Hardware Current rig, upgrade options?

[Satangel]

For modern games, yeah, but why would you want a 560? There are much better cards in the market. You'd need to OC the CPU though.

I can get the 560 a lot cheaper, secondhand I can even get it for 100 USD or so. If that would get me another 2 years, I'd be very happy.
And yes, I plan on overclocking the CPU.

GTA V isn't even announced for PC.

That's true, but won't it be made on the same engine as GTA IV? I think the 560 should make it possible for me to play that game.

4GB is good.

Honestly, I'd sell your PC and build a new one

Is the RAM fast enough?
I don't want to spend a lot on the PC, mainly because my (gaming) future is unclear. Don't know if I'll still game in 3 years from now.

 

[Kirito-kun]

There's no point getting the GTX 560 or GTX 560 Ti. There's a cheaper card from Nvidia that performs better than both of those cards: the GTX 650 Ti Boost. Get this card instead. There's no point getting a last-gen card when the 600s series are out.

 

[trumpet-205]

There's no point getting the GTX 560 or GTX 560 Ti. There's a cheaper card from Nvidia that performs better than both of those cards: the GTX 650 Ti Boost. Get this card instead. There's no point getting a last-gen card when the 600s series are out.

Incorrect. 650 Ti Boost is no faster than 560 Ti regular, and slower than 560 Ti 448 Core.

600 series GPU are more efficient than 500 series GPU though.

 

[CompassNorth]

I can get the 560 a lot cheaper, secondhand I can even get it for 100 USD or so. If that would get me another 2 years, I'd be very happy.
And yes, I plan on overclocking the CPU.

Then go for it

That's true, but won't it be made on the same engine as GTA IV? I think the 560 should make it possible for me to play that game.

Well yeah, but engine update over time. Just look at Morrowind and Oblivion they both used the same engine but the system requirements are on a different scale, not only take but take the Unreal Engine 3 into perspective which is a great example of what I'm trying to say. My old computer could of handled Borderlands 1 fine on medium at 720p, but struggled to handle Borderlands 2 at low, shadows disabled, with ini tweaks, at 640x480. (Yes, it was showing it's age) Just because it's the same engine does not mean the system requirements are going to be the same.

Is the RAM fast enough?

Does it even matter honestly?
If you're at 1066 I say stay there, if not and you really want to upgrade I say go to 1066.

I don't want to spend a lot on the PC, mainly because my (gaming) future is unclear. Don't know if I'll still game in 3 years from now.

This is the main consequence when it comes to PC gaming, you're going to have to upgrade your PC for it to keep with the times.

Your PC is starting to show it's age and it definitely will not last with next-gen/future PC games for 3 years.

 

[Kirito-kun]

Incorrect. 650 Ti Boost is no faster than 560 Ti regular, and slower than 560 Ti 448 Core.

600 series GPU are more efficient than 500 series GPU though.

Where's your source? My research says otherwise.

Wikipedia:

GTX 560 Ti = 1263.4 FLOPS
GTX 560 Ti 448 Core = 1311.7 FLOPS

GTX 650 Ti - 1420.8 FLOPS
GTX 650 Ti Boost = 1505.28 FLOPS

 

[trumpet-205]

Where's your source? My research says otherwise.

Wikipedia:

GTX 560 Ti = 1263.4 FLOPS
GTX 560 Ti 448 Core = 1311.7 FLOPS

GTX 650 Ti - 1420.8 FLOPS
GTX 650 Ti Boost = 1505.28 FLOPS

Do you even know the meaning of FLOPS? FLOPS is a very loose measurement of GPGPU performance, NOT gaming performance. It is very loose because GPGPU performance ultimately comes down to implementation.

I actually have to correct myself a bit, GTX 650 Boost is 10% faster than 560 Ti regular, but not 560 Ti 448 Core (derated version of GTX 570).

http://gpuboss.com/gpus/GeForce-GTX-650-Ti-Boost-vs-GeForce-GTX-560-Ti

 

[Kirito-kun]

Do you even know the meaning of FLOPS? FLOPS is a very loose measurement of GPGPU performance, NOT gaming performance. It is very loose because GPGPU performance ultimately comes down to implementation.

I actually have to correct myself a bit, GTX 650 Boost is 10% faster than 560 Ti regular, but not 560 Ti 448 Core (derated version of GTX 570).

http://gpuboss.com/gpus/GeForce-GTX-650-Ti-Boost-vs-GeForce-GTX-560-Ti

FLOPS is the most accurate measure of the raw processing power of a GPU. Yes, I know what it means, it is a reflection on the number of floating-point operations the GPU can accomplish in a second.

Game and synthetic benchmarks aren't accurate as they depend on factors like drivers, game optimization and the rest components in the test rig. It may not directly equal real-world performance, but FLOPS are still the most accurate bay to measure GPU beformance.

 

[Fishaman P]

With that budget, get something like an AMD Radeon HD 7870 or an NVidia Geforce GTX 760 Ti. Not exactly equal, but w/e.

 

[trumpet-205]

FLOPS is the most accurate measure of the raw processing power of a GPU. Yes, I know what it means, it is a reflection on the number of floating-point operations the GPU can accomplish in a second.

Game and synthetic benchmarks aren't accurate as they depend on factors like drivers, game optimization and the rest components in the test rig. It may not directly equal real-world performance, but FLOPS are still the most accurate bay to measure GPU beformance.

FLOPS is NOT the most accurate way to measure processing power or gaming performance.

Take SHA-256 calculation popularly used in Bitcoin mining. SHA-256 involves a series calculations, and one of them is called 32-bit right bit shift, where the least significant bit is attached to the most significant bit and everything else is shifted to the right.

On AMD Radeon, it has an special instruction where 32-bit right bit shift can be done with just one instruction/cycle. On Nvidia (with the exception of Tesla, Titan, and 780), it has no such instruction. Instead Nvidia must do 2 shifts and 1 add, hence 3 instructions/cycles. This alone makes Nvidia lags behind AMD when it comes to SHA-256 calculation. FLOPS does not mean everything, implementation does.

Also, I'll quote this,

A GTX 480 is rated at around 1300 GFLOPs.
An AMD 5870 is rated at around 2700 GFLOPs.
According to that it must mean the 5870 is more than two times the power of a GTX 480.
Contrary to that the GTX 480 is quite a bit more powerful than a 5870.

http://www.gamespot.com/forums/topic/29356956/is-1.84-tflops-a-lot-for-a-gpu

 

[Thanatos Telos]

With that budget, get something like an AMD Radeon HD 7870 or an NVidia Geforce GTX 760 Ti. Not exactly equal, but w/e.

760 ti doesn't exist. Anyway, a severe bottleneck would occur. The highest I'd rec for an LGA775 based platform would be a 7850. (Only for C2Qs, C2Ds can go up to the 7770 or even 7790 without bottleneck and Pentium duals can go up to the 7750.)

EDIT: trumpet-205 I agree with you, but Gamespot, really? It is LITERALLY a copy of Gamefaqs. (Correct use of literally, BTW) Shame on you!

 

[trumpet-205]

EDIT: trumpet-205 I agree with you, but Gamespot, really? It is LITERALLY a copy of Gamefaqs. (Correct use of literally, BTW) Shame on you!

Well Kirito-kun used Wikipedia as his/her source, so we both suck on quoting.

 

[Thanatos Telos]

Well Kirito-kun used Wikipedia as his/her source, so we both suck on quoting.

Rise to the occasion and use this for the evidence.

Though I will say that the 650 ti Boost will run a lot cooler. Fermi was power hungry and hot. Kepler is the opposite of it.

EDIT: And by hot, I mean nVidia had to rec specific cases for SLI, and they themselves said that limited SLI support (Customer support) would be given if used in other cases IIRC. Really, 160 degrees under load? My 760 runs at around 90. (Both in Farenheit)

EDIT2: ANDOHMYGABEN they designed it to run HOT by default.

 

[Kirito-kun]

FLOPS is NOT the most accurate way to measure processing power or gaming performance.

Take SHA-256 calculation popularly used in Bitcoin mining. SHA-256 involves a series calculations, and one of them is called 32-bit right bit shift, where the least significant bit is attached to the most significant bit and everything else is shifted to the right.

On AMD Radeon, it has an special instruction where 32-bit right bit shift can be done with just one instruction/cycle. On Nvidia (with the exception of Tesla, Titan, and 780), it has no such instruction. Instead Nvidia must do 2 shifts and 1 add, hence 3 instructions/cycles. This alone makes Nvidia lags behind AMD when it comes to SHA-256 calculation. FLOPS does not mean everything, implementation does.

Also, I'll quote this,


http://www.gamespot.com/forums/topic/29356956/is-1.84-tflops-a-lot-for-a-gpu

Regardless, the GTX 650 Ti Boost is about $80 cheaper than the GTX 560 Ti and $120 cheaper than the GTX 560 Ti 488 core. Even if it's only slightly better for gaming than the 560 Ti and less powerful than the 560 Ti 448 core, it still constitutes a significantly higher performance-to-price ratio.

You also get a newer architecture (Kepler vs Fermi) and lower power consumption. The lower temperatures will allow for more overclocking, allowing you to possibly exceed the gaming performance of the GTX 560 Ti 448 core. Kepler also comes with other features like support for TXAA. The GTX 650 Ti Boost is the better package overall.

 

[Thanatos Telos]

Regardless, the GTX 650 Ti Boost is about $80 cheaper than the GTX 560 Ti and $120 cheaper than the GTX 560 Ti 488 core. Even if it's only slightly better for gaming than the 560 Ti and less powerful than the 560 Ti 448 core, it still constitutes a significantly higher performance-to-price ratio.

You also get a newer architecture (Kepler vs Fermi) and lower power consumption. The lower temperatures will allow for more overclocking, allowing you to possibly exceed the gaming performance of the GTX 560 Ti 448 core. Kepler also comes with other features like support for TXAA. The GTX 650 Ti Boost is the better package overall.

Not right now. At microcenter, a 560ti is only a 100$.

 

[trumpet-205]

Regardless, the GTX 650 Ti Boost is about $80 cheaper than the GTX 560 Ti and $120 cheaper than the GTX 560 Ti 488 core. Even if it's only slightly better for gaming than the 560 Ti and less powerful than the 560 Ti 448 core, it still constitutes a significantly higher performance-to-price ratio.

You also get a newer architecture (Kepler vs Fermi) and lower power consumption. The lower temperatures will allow for more overclocking, allowing you to possibly exceed the gaming performance of the GTX 560 Ti 448 core. Kepler also comes with other features like support for TXAA. The GTX 650 Ti Boost is the better package overall.

GTX 650 Ti Boost may be a better overall package, but considering that OP is living in Belgium, I wager that price difference (not launch price, market price) between 650 Ti Boost and 560 TI is quite a bit.

Also, Fermi is more friendly to overclocking than Kepler. Starting with Kepler Nvidia imposed voltage lock. You won't be able to adjust voltage to a great degree without hacking the VBIOS.

 

[Satangel]

Then go for it
Well yeah, but engine update over time. Just look at Morrowind and Oblivion they both used the same engine but the system requirements are on a different scale, not only take but take the Unreal Engine 3 into perspective which is a great example of what I'm trying to say. My old computer could of handled Borderlands 1 fine on medium at 720p, but struggled to handle Borderlands 2 at low, shadows disabled, with ini tweaks, at 640x480. (Yes, it was showing it's age) Just because it's the same engine does not mean the system requirements are going to be the same.

Hmmm, okay that does make sense.

Does it even matter honestly?
If you're at 1066 I say stay there, if not and you really want to upgrade I say go to 1066.

This is my RAM;

I don't think that's 1066?

I think upgrading te RAM to the max my motherboard (ASUS P5E) might help a bit. When I play LoL it sometimes gets lag while I have Skype/Foobar/Firefox open at the same time. Not a good sign :/

This is the main consequence when it comes to PC gaming, you're going to have to upgrade your PC for it to keep with the times.

Your PC is starting to show it's age and it definitely will not last with next-gen/future PC games for 3 years.

If it can run GTA V, I'm very happy already.
I'm mainly scared to really spend money on a graphics card because I don't know for sure when I'll upgrade the next part of my PC. Will the graphics card even fit on that new, better motherboard?

And yeah, I'm looking for a second hand graphics card, probably a 560. It's cheap, a very big step-up for my current card, and definitely not overkill (considering the other components I currently have)

 

[Originality]

Graphics cards have used PCIe for a while now (it's nearly impossible to find an AGP graphics card these days). PCIe 3.0 has only just started being used, so any graphics card you get will be compatible for the next 4-5 years minimum.

Without taking any time to look up specs for GTA V from my shaky internet connection in France, I imagine it will have higher reqs than GTA IV, which wasn't exactly smooth on normal PCs in the first place. Slower RAM may have an impact on performance, although I usually see games specifying minimum quantity of RAM instead of speed.

 

[Satangel]

CPU cooler: Arctic Freezer 7 Pro
Motherboard: ASUS P5E

Well I'm going to overlock the CPU soon, haven't really researched a lot but I've read I could go as far as 4Ghz with the Q6600!
It's at 2,4 Ghz atm, I think I'll go to 3 Ghz when on heavy load straight away. Now I'm just contemplating; is it worth changing the thermal paste between CPU and CPU cooler? It's 5 years old, hasn't been replaced, cooler and CPU have never been seperated.

My CPU never goes above 60 degrees Celsius btw, in BF3 it maxes out at 57 degrees.