CPU/Mobo Time to upgrade

[Emil]

My system, specially bootup has become rather slow or I have gotten more impatient. Using Win XP with AMD Athlon X2 3600 on Jetway 690 Mobo and 2 x 1GB 667 RAM all bought in mid 2007.

I was keen to upgrade in Dec 09 but was advised here at TE to wait till the launch of i3. Good advice that was. As is my usual habit, I wait till new technology matures before hopping on rather than being the guinea pig. So here I am again.

I want to migrate to Windows 7 Home and would like to upgrade my CPU, Mobo and RAM (if needed)

Usage - Positively no gaming. Just the normal browsing, Open Office, uTorrents, Skype and other VOIP applications, a little amateur photo editing.

No well-defined budget but I have no interest in throwing away money. Obviously my existing CPU+Mobo+RAM would be sold to raise some money to finance this operation

Leaning towards i3 - 530 on a Intel h55 Mobo and 2x2GB RAM.

Would that be the right choice or is there better value to be had by looking at an alternative?

 

[DarkAngel]

My system, specially bootup has become rather slow or I have gotten more impatient. Using Win XP with AMD Athlon X2 3600 on Jetway 690 Mobo and 2 x 1GB 667 RAM all bought in mid 2007.

I was keen to upgrade in Dec 09 but was advised here at TE to wait till the launch of i3. Good advice that was. As is my usual habit, I wait till new technology matures before hopping on rather than being the guinea pig. So here I am again.

I want to migrate to Windows 7 Home and would like to upgrade my CPU, Mobo and RAM (if needed)

Usage - Positively no gaming. Just the normal browsing, Open Office, uTorrents, Skype and other VOIP applications, a little amateur photo editing.

No well-defined budget but I have no interest in throwing away money. Obviously my existing CPU+Mobo+RAM would be sold to raise some money to finance this operation

Leaning towards i3 - 530 on a Intel h55 Mobo and 2x2GB RAM.

Would that be the right choice or is there better value to be had by looking at an alternative?

Is it a AM2+ mobo? If so then u can add drop in an inexpensive AthlonII X2/X3 for a performance boost.

The reason i am asking u to do this coz LGA1156 will become obsolete as Sandbridge is just 4-5 months away and then AMD will also launch fusion products which looks quite promising.

If u want to go for newer tech now i would say opt for AMD now as u can get better features in the mid range.

AthlonII X3 435 ~ 3.5k

Gigabyte 785GMT USB3/ 880GMA-UD2H~5.7k. Both has eSata and USB 3.0

2*2GB 1333MHz DDR3 Corsair Value RAM ~ 4.7k

 

[Aces170]

Usage - Positively no gaming. Just the normal browsing, Open Office, uTorrents, Skype and other VOIP applications, a little amateur photo editing.

May I ask you why do you want to upgrade? Your present system will be able to handle all the said applications with ease. I am in the same boat as you, with an identical configuration (X2 4000), coupled with a 4850, almost all games work at good quality in full HD resolution. Just do a fresh install of Windows 7, will solve most of the lag issues building up in the XP installation. Get more RAM, and you are good to go.

 

[SidhuScorpion]

How about sticking with your processor/motherboard as long as possible (X2 3600+ is a decent proccy for above mentioned tasks) and upgrading to SSD (60GB Sandforce based) and 4GB RAM ?

 

[Zloyd]

???!!!???

60gb ssd ? for what lol ? That just seems like a waste of money for his requirements. I think he has the right idea , get a Gigabyte H55 board and you are good to go.

 

[Emil]

@DA & Aces170 - It is a 939 socket. Actually there is no great hurry to upgrade. Just that the system runs slow. And since it has clocked 3 years on the calendar (not that much actual usage really) I thought it better to upgrade before problems begin. Yes the suggestion of fresh OS install is good and I'm sure will give me some immediate benefit. Was going to do it but thought there was no point in going through it now if I upgrade the h/w a short time later. The problem with my usage is not the kind of applications but the number of windows I keep open and work on.
I looked at the CPU comparison on AnandTech and found that the i3-530 seems to be far ahead of similar priced competition. That is why I was drawn to it.
As to why not wait for something newer, it is not in my nature to jump to a new tech before everyone else. A. I like to wait till it matures and gets proven and B. The solution cost comes down as it matures. When I went for the Athlon X2 back in June/July 2007, Core2Duo had already hit the market. You get my point?
So yes Karthi your suggestion could make sense for me as well. Tell me in my kind of usage, with no gfx card, giving a score of 100 to my existing setup how would you score your X3 435 suggestion and the i3-530 option?

--- Updated Post - Automerged ---

How about sticking with your processor/motherboard as long as possible (X2 3600+ is a decent proccy for above mentioned tasks) and upgrading to SSD (60GB Sandforce based) and 4GB RAM ?

Yes that would certainly give me a dream bootup but at what cost? Actually my current boot partition is just 40 GB so perhaps even a 40 GB SSD could work but wouldn't the bucks be better spent elsewhere?

 

[DarkAngel]

@DA & Aces170 - It is a 939 socket. Actually there is no great hurry to upgrade. Just that the system runs slow. And since it has clocked 3 years on the calendar (not that much actual usage really) I thought it better to upgrade before problems begin. Yes the suggestion of fresh OS install is good and I'm sure will give me some immediate benefit. Was going to do it but thought there was no point in going through it now if I upgrade the h/w a short time later. The problem with my usage is not the kind of applications but the number of windows I keep open and work on.

I looked at the CPU comparison on AnandTech and found that the i3-530 seems to be far ahead of similar priced competition. That is why I was drawn to it.

As to why not wait for something newer, it is not in my nature to jump to a new tech before everyone else. A. I like to wait till it matures and gets proven and B. The solution cost comes down as it matures. When I went for the Athlon X2 back in June/July 2007, Core2Duo had already hit the market. You get my point?

So yes Karthi your suggestion could make sense for me as well. Tell me in my kind of usage, with no gfx card, giving a score of 100 to my existing setup how would you score your X3 435 suggestion and the i3-530 option?

--- Updated Post - Automerged ---


Yes that would certainly give me a dream bootup but at what cost? Actually my current boot partition is just 40 GB so perhaps even a 40 GB SSD could work but wouldn't the bucks be better spent elsewhere?

Bench - CPU - AnandTech :: Your Source for Hardware Analysis and News

Bench - CPU - AnandTech :: Your Source for Hardware Analysis and News

The closest comparison i was able to find is the AMD Athlon X2 4050e which IINM is exactly the same as ur proccy but clocked ~10% higher. The AthlonII X3 435 trumps the AMD Athlon X2 4050e by an avg. of 2.5-3 times.

In the next comparison between the i-3 530 and the AthlonII X3 435 the Athlon is within 10% of the i-3 530's performance in apps that stresses all cores but the gap widens when lesser cores are stressed and the architectural superiority of the i-3 is evident with advantage of upto 50% over the AthlonII X3 435 in few apps. Then again considering the price factor the i-3 530 costs ~60% more.

Plus for 5.5k u can get a AM3 with loads of features so that ur connectivity options are all covered for the next 3 years or so as u do not do frequent upgrades. Even though not confirmed the Bulldozer may support AM3 socket. Even if not u will have the option of going upto a 6-core processor and doing a cheap upgrade in future if need be.

As u keep loads of windows open IMO 4GB RAM and a cheap AthlonII X3 should do the job. PoBoy even successfully unlocked the AthlonII X3 435 to a AthlonII X4 quad with the Gigabyte 785GM-US2H~4.1k(DDRII AM2+ mobo)

As far ppl thinking of buying SSD's on a budget its better to wait till December as capacity will double due to 25nm NAND flash technology.

 

[Aces170]

Was going to do it but thought there was no point in going through it now if I upgrade the h/w a short time later. The problem with my usage is not the kind of applications but the number of windows I keep open and work on.

How many windows do you keep open? At work I have 5-6 excel sheets+5/6 word docs+2/3 PPT's+ 7/8 PDF's+ 2/3 Firefox windows with 7-8 tabs each (the present count) and its working flawlessly on a X2 4000, with 2 gigs RAM. Historically the only programs which we use often that require a good processing power were games, but thanks to the "dumbing down" effect of consoles, even a 3 year old low end processor combined with a mid end GPU is able to suffice. I had nearly snatched on the new X6 CPU's before realizing, that I dont really require it, and hence I spent it on my other hobby, where the gain was more tangible.

 

[Emil]

Bench - CPU - AnandTech :: Your Source for Hardware Analysis and News
Bench - CPU - AnandTech :: Your Source for Hardware Analysis and News

Thanks.

The closest comparison i was able to find is the AMD Athlon X2 4050e which IINM is exactly the same as ur proccy but clocked ~10% higher. The AthlonII X3 435 trumps the AMD Athlon X2 4050e by an avg. of 2.5-3 times.

IINM the 'e' suffix denotes lower TDP and this version is close to the X2 4000+ I guess. I get the point that the A II X3 435 is probably more than enough for me.

In the next comparison between the i-3 530 and the AthlonII X3 435 the Athlon is within 10% of the i-3 530's performance in apps that stresses all cores but the gap widens when lesser cores are stressed and the architectural superiority of the i-3 is evident with advantage of upto 50% over the AthlonII X3 435 in few apps. Then again considering the price factor the i-3 530 costs ~60% more.

The one specification in which the Clarkdales beat any AMD offering is in the power consumption. Now I am not really a green peace member by any chance but that appeals to me as an electronics engineer of ancient vintage because I associate low power with lower heat dissipation and consequently better long term system reliability. That is the primary reason I am attracted to the i3 but it is not a fatal attraction and I am open to options. Regarding the price, it is important to look at it as the cost of CPU+Mobo and then compare %

Plus for 5.5k u can get a AM3 with loads of features so that ur connectivity options are all covered for the next 3 years or so as u do not do frequent upgrades. Even though not confirmed the Bulldozer may support AM3 socket. Even if not u will have the option of going upto a 6-core processor and doing a cheap upgrade in future if need be.

As u keep loads of windows open IMO 4GB RAM and a cheap AthlonII X3 should do the job. PoBoy even successfully unlocked the AthlonII X3 435 to a AthlonII X4 quad with the Gigabyte 785GM-US2H~4.1k(DDRII AM2+ mobo).

I like the 3 year time frame for upgrades as a personal policy because most components have 3 years warranties. The X3 435 does look like an attractive option for me. And pairing it with a 4.1K Mobo with the possibility of unlocking core 4 makes it sweeter still. This means I can continue with my old 2x1GB 667 Mhz Kingstons I suppose. Or will the RAMs be too slow for the 435? Or is there any other reasonably priced Mobo which will accept DDR2/DDR3 so that I can use my current DDR2 for a while and later switch to 2x2GB DDR3?

--- Updated Post - Automerged ---

How many windows do you keep open? At work I have 5-6 excel sheets+5/6 word docs+2/3 PPT's+ 7/8 PDF's+ 2/3 Firefox windows with 7-8 tabs each (the present count) and its working flawlessly on a X2 4000, with 2 gigs RAM. Historically the only programs which we use often that require a good processing power were games, but thanks to the "dumbing down" effect of consoles, even a 3 year old low end processor combined with a mid end GPU is able to suffice. I had nearly snatched on the new X6 CPU's before realizing, that I dont really require it, and hence I spent it on my other hobby, where the gain was more tangible.

I like the maturity of your thinking. No upgrade just to jump on to the newest fad out there.
I started to consider upgrading because my current rig, though trouble-free, has run its 3 year course and out of its warranty so better upgrade now while it is still running good and I have the possibility of salvaging a decent bit on resale (this point is vital to convince the better half for accepting the plan).
My situation with multiple tasks is much like yours though at home I also have applications like utorrent and 2-3 VOIP applications also running. I believe the upgrade along with Win7 would handle this situation better with larger number of cores/threading.
BTW nice siggy.

 

[Aces170]

^^ Hehe diffrent school of thoughts there. I am more of a "why fix it if aint broken" wrt computer hardware. Resale value will be negligible. But yeah, as we arent used to older tech, the shiny new parts is a temptation. The i3's have a lower thermal envelope, but have a look at AMD's 'e' offerings too, I dont think performance is an utmost priority for you, I agree with your lower power viewpoint.

 

[Malique]

^^^ i am also of the same school of thought "why fix if it ain't broken"

Emil, i would suggest that you stick to your current config, just add 2 gigs of ram and you are good to go with your multitasking.

and you can add an entry level discrete graphic card can take off the graphics processing load from your CPU and that should give some more breathing space to your proccy and also allow you to watch some HD movies.

 

[bottle]

Another vote for a ssd/ raptor, retain your existing system and speed up i/o

 

[Emil]

Another vote for a ssd/ raptor, retain your existing system and speed up i/o

repeating my question to the same suggestion earlier. At what cost?

--- Updated Post - Automerged ---

and you can add an entry level discrete graphic card can take off the graphics processing load from your CPU and that should give some more breathing space to your proccy and also allow you to watch some HD movies.

Are you certain about that? AFAIK the onboard gfx normally shares the main memory with the CPU and that is a concern. As far as processing is concerned, I believe the gfx processor is on the Mobo itself so it shouldn't actually load the CPU should it? Granted the onboard processor may not be as good as a discrete gfx card but does the CPU have to do more work when the GPU is onboard?

 

[ch@ts]

Apparently AM2+ and AM3 cpus will work in the socket for AMD's new bulldozer cpu's, but the bulldozer cpu's won't work in the older socket.
If your motherboard supports AM3 cpu's, I'd suggest going for an Athlon II X4, or a Phenom II X4.
But, I think your m/b would have only 2 RAM sockets, so you'd need to buy some new RAM, and I don't think it makes any sense to buy 4GB of new DDR2 memory at this point. So, unless you can manage with your current 2GB of RAM for some time more, I'd suggest going for a platform change.
If 2GB's enough for you for say the next year or so, then just upgrade the CPU, and then upgrade the m/b+RAM when you need to.

The upside of this is -
1) it's cheaper
2) no need to worry about re-installations, drivers, etc
3) you'll get pretty large performance gains

The downside is -
1) Using 64 bit win7 with 2GB of RAM will be a pain
2) You'll be using an older m/b, which may be on it's last legs
3) You'll be using a less power efficient platform
Regarding your onboard gpu, it certainly won't tax your cpu when handling graphic processing tasks. But newer gpu's have better video decoding engines, and can offload flash processing as well...so your computer won't slow down when you visit some flash heavy web page.

Btw..I've got the same processor as you, and I've noticed that boot times have come down and my system has become more responsive since I began using win7. I've got 3GB of RAM, and a 5670 gpu, and I think my system can handle pretty much any task. The only time I've noticed it's age is while gaming, where my cpu's age is immediately apparent.

I suggest that you first try upgrading to windows 7, and if your system still feels slow, then either upgrade your processor, or your entire system, depending on your preference.

 

[Malique]

Are you certain about that? AFAIK the onboard gfx normally shares the main memory with the CPU and that is a concern. As far as processing is concerned, I believe the gfx processor is on the Mobo itself so it shouldn't actually load the CPU should it? Granted the onboard processor may not be as good as a discrete gfx card but does the CPU have to do more work when the GPU is onboard?

yes, Onboard graphics chipsets do share the main memory, so that reduces your total available memory. So having a separate GPU would help here. No, the CPU will not have to work more in the presence of graphic card, display related work would be off loaded to the GPU. these days even the flash videos are quite taxing on older proccy's.
NOT SURE:-> discrete GPU would have its won separate lanes so even that wont be shared by the CPU, making the bus lanes free for other tasks.

additional tip: you can also overclock your CPU to get a little extra juice. you can safely increase 200-300 MHz your stock cooler. it can go much higher but would then require a good cooler, again you can get lucky by keeping a watch on the market section for some used CPU coolers.

Also, you can safely install Win7 64bit on your pc. This is from personal exp, i have win7 64 bit ULTIMATE on my "laptop" with intel T4300 2.1ghz older pentium dual core cpu with 3gb ram. with multiple windows open (similar to yours) the memory utilization does not exceed beyond 2-2.2gb.
even worst, i had first installed vista x64 ultimate in virtual box on my p4 1.7 with 512 ram running windows XP. can you beat that hyeah:

My point is there is a lot of life left in your system based on the usage you've mentioned.

 

[Emil]

@ iamddevil - My Mobo supports 939 socket CPUs. You have presented your arguments excellently. Will Win 7 give any performance improvement over Win XP if I do not change the hardware at all? I mean no additional RAM either as it would mean buying 2x1 GB DDR2 or buying 2x2GB and selling my existing 2x1GBs.

To clarify, I just want reliability and decent speed for the tasks I do. I upgrade once in 3 years or more and I am not a gamer. Since I upgrade infrequently, I am not looking for incremental performance gain but quantum jump in performance. My upgrade is not urgent and I am unlikely to go ahead for just a small increment unless it is just an OC on stock cooler which would not really incur cost. The SSD looks like a viable suggestion if it gives me quantum improvement in performance as the investment will carry seamlessly into future upgrades. Any idea about the cost involved and links to show real world performance gain?

 

[DarkAngel]

@ iamddevil - My Mobo supports 939 socket CPUs. You have presented your arguments excellently. Will Win 7 give any performance improvement over Win XP if I do not change the hardware at all? I mean no additional RAM either as it would mean buying 2x1 GB DDR2 or buying 2x2GB and selling my existing 2x1GBs.
To clarify, I just want reliability and decent speed for the tasks I do. I upgrade once in 3 years or more and I am not a gamer. Since I upgrade infrequently, I am not looking for incremental performance gain but quantum jump in performance. My upgrade is not urgent and I am unlikely to go ahead for just a small increment unless it is just an OC on stock cooler which would not really incur cost. The SSD looks like a viable suggestion if it gives me quantum improvement in performance as the investment will carry seamlessly into future upgrades. Any idea about the cost involved and links to show real world performance gain?

Corsair's Force SSD Reviewed: SF-1200 is Very Good - AnandTech :: Your Source for Hardware Analysis and News
Corsair's Force SSD Reviewed: SF-1200 is Very Good - AnandTech :: Your Source for Hardware Analysis and News

Check Anandtech for SSD reviews. They have excellent ind-depth SSD reviews.
As of now the Corsiar Force 40GB drive sells for 7k. In december capacity will double due to newer 25nm NAND. So hold off SSD upgrade till then.

 

[ch@ts]

If your motherboard supports DDR2 RAM, it's got to be a socket AM2 motherboard, with 940 pins.
Socket 939 processors only worked with DDR1 RAM.

And yes, to answer your question, upgrading to Windows 7 would make your computer work more smoothly, though not faster.
Windows 7 boots faster because it starts services in a staggered manner, starting the ones the system needs first, and the optional ones later. It also uses RAM better. I've got 3GB of RAM, and in XP, I barely use 1 GB. But in Windows 7 almost all my memory is used. And this is a good thing, because frequently used programs get cached in memory, making applications launch faster, and making the system more responsive.

 

[sri_k]

Going by your query,i agree with iamdevil post...Upgrading your processor would surely give some more peroformance&also you could easily get AthlonX2 5000+ or 5600+ secondhand at a fairly low price from TE market..
Also no point in uprgarding RAM since DDR2&DDR3 almost cost the same so it doesnt make sense to go with DDR2...

 

[Emil]

If your motherboard supports DDR2 RAM, it's got to be a socket AM2 motherboard, with 940 pins.

Socket 939 processors only worked with DDR1 RAM.

I am pretty certain that my RAM is DDR2. However I could be mistaken about the CPU socket. I vaguely remember that the 940 pin AM2 was newly introduced at that time and I feel I stuck to the 939. Can anyone confirm whether the Athlon x2 3600+ CPU came in sock 939 or AM2 or both? Anyway I can confirm which socket mine is myself when I see it at home.

And yes, to answer your question, upgrading to Windows 7 would make your computer work more smoothly, though not faster.

Windows 7 boots faster because it starts services in a staggered manner, starting the ones the system needs first, and the optional ones later. It also uses RAM better. I've got 3GB of RAM, and in XP, I barely use 1 GB. But in Windows 7 almost all my memory is used. And this is a good thing, because frequently used programs get cached in memory, making applications launch faster, and making the system more responsive.

But will it give me the benefit of quicker startup and program launch even if I stick to just the 2x1GB of RAM?