is it worth it upgrading this pc?


Recommended Posts

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/ca/en/ho/WF06b/12132708-12133156-12133158-12133158-12133158-80626463-81048856.html?dnr=1

this is my PC

but a few things I have upgraded on it over time.

OS is Windows 8 consumer preview 64 bit

i have 2 external hard drives.

Iomega- 1TB

clickfree- 2TB

Video card- sonic GF 9600gt 512mb PCI-X

Acer V193 17" lcd monitor

i'm trying to get back to computer games,

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1067234-is-it-worth-it-upgrading-this-pc/
Share on other sites

When you say upgrade I'm guessing you mean keep the motherboard and perhaps upgrade the Memory and Graphics?

Based on the specifications listed on that page I would say this is using hardware from around late 2005 to early 2006. That was 6 years ago and I'd not recommend upgrading it. You would probably do yourself better buying a new system.

However if you really just want to upgrade then perhaps a GTX 560 would be appropriate. It would definitely be faster than the 9600GT you currently have but I'm not really sure how much of an improvement it would make with that processor. The latest games are more CPU demanding than that processor can muster.

any significant upgrades would require a mobo swap and that more then likely wouldnt be compatable with the case you have ( front harness). would prolly be cheaper to just get a new one.

i would get amd 6850 or 5770 for that system if you're an occasional gamer like me.But if you're a hardcore gamer then you would have to upgrade cpu-mobo-ram all together.Probably something like i5 or i7 series with amd 7950 or nvidia equivalent and throwing an ssd drive would be the cream on top

It would cost more to upgrade than it's worth to. Sorry mate. :(

agreed.

you could do some upgrades but i don't think they would really be worth it at this point.

you could spend $150-3 hundred on upgrades or get a brand new pre-built oem pc for around 500 or less. but everything in it would be dramatically faster than any upgrade you could make to your old computer.

if you don't want to build your own get a cheap oem pc, then clean install windows with the key on the side of your new pc. also try and get something that is upgrade friendly. (as much as it can for an oem)

Here's what you do. Buy a Geforce GTX 560Ti and put it in your current system and see if it runs to your liking. There's a good chance that it will because you only have a 17" monitor.

If you find your CPU isn't up to the task, then you go ahead and buy a cheap prebuilt i5 system and use the 560Ti to upgrade from the onboard graphics, then you'll most certainly be set.

Here's what you do. Buy a Geforce GTX 560Ti and put it in your current system and see if it runs to your liking. There's a good chance that it will because you only have a 17" monitor.

If you find your CPU isn't up to the task, then you go ahead and buy a cheap prebuilt i5 system and use the 560Ti to upgrade from the onboard graphics, then you'll most certainly be set.

+1

Here's what you do. Buy a Geforce GTX 560Ti and put it in your current system and see if it runs to your liking. There's a good chance that it will because you only have a 17" monitor.

If you find your CPU isn't up to the task, then you go ahead and buy a cheap prebuilt i5 system and use the 560Ti to upgrade from the onboard graphics, then you'll most certainly be set.

Wouldn't recommend that as pre-built systems tend to come with restrictive power supplies. I would just build a straight down new computer, if you want to run the latest and greatest games at the highest quality possible. Otherise your computer should be ok, if you play games at lower quality and lower resolutions.

hello all I would like to keep the 9600gt but get new ram, cpu, motherboard

and I prefer amd then intel.

You're making all the bad choices for gaming.

1: More RAM, a better CPU and a better motherboard really won't increase your gaming performance quite a lot. And if you want to do that, you will have to get a new case too. And you really wouldn't get a big performance increase at all, your graphics card is limiting you in this case.

2: And why would you prefer AMD? Intel processors perform so much better right now, even when you take price into account Intel still is a much better deal in almost any case in my opinion.

Intel processor and AMD graphics are the best way to go.

Nothing beats a 6850 in terms of value for money at the moment, if you have a budget. Nothing comes close.

i5-2400

Cheapish H67 Motherboard

8Gb DDR3 Ram

HD 6850

400 - 500W 80+ PSU

Save the drives from your current system for now. Maybe get a larger internal hard drive, if you need one.

hello all I would like to keep the 9600gt but get new ram, cpu, motherboard

and I prefer amd then intel.

As Yoda said, "you must unlearn, what you have learned" -

9600gt - is not a gamer card not even 5 years ago, AMD was better than intel .... 10 years ago.

BUT if you want to get AMD - then their new stuff would be a quantum leap compared the the junk you have now, yes its junk.

As mentioned, go get a cheap, Core i5 for $350, get a $150 video card, and a good PSU - you have a modern gaming machine - enjoy.

as fas as wakers comments about the HDD - if they are half as old as the rest of that dinosaur - then you're already on borrowed time - and the act of installing an OS could very well push an HDD over the edge - then what have you got ?

If you realize this, and are trying to spread out the $$ - then keep the drive - but always knowing in the back of your mind that it can and will go out @ any minute ... you decide.

The HDD is one of the few pieces with moving parts - therefore it wears out. Avg. life is 4 years on a drive - buy a new one.

As Yoda said, "you must unlearn, what you have learned" -

9600gt - is not a gamer card not even 5 years ago, AMD was better than intel .... 10 years ago.

BUT if you want to get AMD - then their new stuff would be a quantum leap compared the the junk you have now, yes its junk.

As mentioned, go get a cheap, Core i5 for $350, get a $150 video card, and a good PSU - you have a modern gaming machine - enjoy.

as fas as wakers comments about the HDD - if they are half as old as the rest of that dinosaur - then you're already on borrowed time - and the act of installing an OS could very well push an HDD over the edge - then what have you got ?

If you realize this, and are trying to spread out the $$ - then keep the drive - but always knowing in the back of your mind that it can and will go out @ any minute ... you decide.

The HDD is one of the few pieces with moving parts - therefore it wears out. Avg. life is 4 years on a drive - buy a new one.

4 years?

I've got one that I've been using intensively for over 8 years and it's still in top health. Very small though!

Yeah that's way off from my experience. We've got about 20 computers at work, most of which have HDDs that go back to 2005/2006. Never had a failure. I've got HDDs at home that still work and are over 10 years old.

The figures may be skewed by "production error" failures - i.e. brand new drives that go kaput because something went wrong (as opposed to them being too old). If you take out the data from faulty drives that die within 6 months, I'd be very surprised if the average life of an HDD was anything less than 8 years.

Oh, and to the OP: your GPU is just way way too old for gaming. You could get yourself a GTX 560Ti and see if that helps - if it doesn't, just build yourself a new PC and stick it in there. Personally, I always love an excuse to build a new gaming computer, so that's what I'd do.

4 yrs. ?? It was the CTO @ Seagate in a MaximumPC article last year - I used to read that mag everyday :blush:

Might be able to reference it elsewhere - he was talking about the silliness of MTBF & 512-bit encryption type things. (because 256 is so easy to brute force kinda of talk)

I remember almost 100% of what I read (kinda nerdy I know) he was kinda funny but was serious when talking about real lifetime as opposed to MTBF.

How silly it is to undermine SSD {A} because its only 1.5 million hours MTBF, as opposed to SSD {B} which is2 million hours MTBF. How people will automatically think SSD {A} is not as good and will fail soon...

I'll google some phrases see if I get ahit & I'll post it - not for austerity - just because it was an interesting read. (it was before all the floods)

  • 2 weeks later...

hello everyone I did some research on computers, these are sold at my local computer store, all prices are in Canadian, I want to use my current video card http://ncix.com/products/?sku=28598, with the system. these are the current systems that they sell.

HP pavilion s5-1020- 499.99

HP pavilion p7-1125-569.99

HP pavilion p7-115-679.99

HP pavilion p6640f-799.99

HP pavilion h8-1010-839.99

would like to play battlefield 3 and newer games at high

hello everyone I did some research on computers, these are sold at my local computer store, all prices are in Canadian, I want to use my current video card http://ncix.com/products/?sku=28598, with the system. these are the current systems that they sell.

HP pavilion s5-1020- 499.99

HP pavilion p7-1125-569.99

HP pavilion p7-115-679.99

HP pavilion p6640f-799.99

HP pavilion h8-1010-839.99

would like to play battlefield 3 and newer games at high

A 9600GT won't get you anywhere near high settings in BF3.

To do that, you'll need at least an i5 w/ 560 Ti card, and even that might be cutting it close.

at least an i5 with 560ti? Id say for maximum. He could easily get high settings with a i3 and a 6870. I run battlefield 3 on high at a resolution of 5760x1080 at around 50fps on the setup below.. There is also a pc in my house from around 4 years ago (X4 9850, 4GB DDR2 and crossfire 4670...) that runs battlefield 3 at high, quite well for its age.

at least an i5 with 560ti? Id say for maximum. He could easily get high settings with a i3 and a 6870. I run battlefield 3 on high at a resolution of 5760x1080 at around 50fps on the setup below.. There is also a pc in my house from around 4 years ago (X4 9850, 4GB DDR2 and crossfire 4670...) that runs battlefield 3 at high, quite well for its age.

BF3 is CPU intensive and an i3 would be a limiting factor. Might as well spend the few extra bucks for a quad core.

Also, you do know that your 6950 is almost an exact equivalent to the 560 Ti, right? Resolution for you isn't a big deal either since yours has 2GB of VRAM.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Pretty nice tool, thanks
    • Indeed. But note that this has Wifi7, HDMI 2.1, BlueTooth 5.4, and 5G Ethernet, so even in the additional features list this bundle blows the Steam Machine away. And, with the money saved, one could improve this dramatically.
    • One of the strangest galaxies in our Universe could help answer some long overdue questions by Sayan Sen Image by Pixabay via Pexels | Not representative An international team of astronomers led by the Department of Astronomy at Tsinghua University has discovered an unusually metal-poor galaxy that may contain signs of first-generation star formation. The galaxy, named Metal-Pristine Galaxy COSMOS Redshift 3 (MPG-CR3), or CR3, was identified using observations from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), the Very Large Telescope (VLT), and the Subaru Telescope. The findings, published in The Astrophysical Journal Letters, describe CR3 as the most metal-poor galaxy known from the period known as "cosmic noon," around 11.5 billion years ago. Cosmic noon refers to a period when the universe was producing stars at its highest rate and galaxies were growing rapidly. In astronomy, "metals" refers to all elements heavier than helium, including oxygen, carbon, and iron. Because CR3 contains so few of these heavier elements, researchers say it closely resembles what scientists expect the earliest galaxies in the universe may have looked like. The discovery is significant because it could offer clues about Population III (Pop III) stars, the first generation of stars thought to have formed after the Big Bang. These stars are believed to have formed from gas made almost entirely of hydrogen and helium, before heavier elements were created inside stars and spread across the universe through supernova explosions. Hence this is why CR3 has been referred to as a "living fossil." Scientists have long believed that Population III stars existed only in the very early universe. As more generations of stars formed and died, they enriched surrounding gas with heavier elements, making the conditions needed for metal-free star formation increasingly rare. Because of this, researchers expected the formation of such stars to have largely ended after the epoch of reionization, a period when radiation from the first stars and galaxies transformed the neutral hydrogen filling the universe and made it largely transparent to ultraviolet light. CR3 appears to challenge that idea. The galaxy was observed at a redshift of z = 3.193 ± 0.016. Redshift measures how much light from a distant object has been stretched as the universe expands and helps astronomers determine how far back in time they are looking. In this case, the redshift corresponds to roughly 11.5 billion years ago during cosmic noon. Although the universe was already several billion years old by that point, CR3 shows characteristics more commonly associated with much earlier galaxies. Observations revealed exceptionally strong emissions from hydrogen and helium, including Lyα, Hα, and He I λ10830. Lyα, or Lyman-alpha emission, is a specific wavelength of light produced by hydrogen and is widely used to study distant galaxies. Hα emission is another hydrogen signature commonly used to trace active star formation, while He I λ10830 is produced by helium and can indicate the presence of very hot, young stars. The measured equivalent widths of EW₀(Lyα) = 822 ± 101 Å and EW₀(Hα) = 2814 ± 327 Å are among the highest ever observed in star-forming galaxies. Equivalent width is a measure of the strength of an emission line relative to the surrounding light, and such large values are typically associated with intense and very recent star formation. At the same time, researchers found no statistically significant detections of metal emission lines, including [O III] λλ4959, 5007 and C IV λλ1548, 1550. Emission lines act as chemical fingerprints that reveal which elements are present in a galaxy. Oxygen and carbon lines are commonly seen in galaxies that have already undergone significant chemical enrichment. Their absence in CR3 suggests an unusually pristine environment. Using abundance calibration methods developed with JWST observations, the team placed a 2σ upper limit on the galaxy's gas-phase metallicity of 12+log(O/H)<6.52, corresponding to less than 0.7% of the Sun's metallicity (Z < 7 × 10⁻³ Z⊙). Gas-phase metallicity measures the abundance of heavy elements in a galaxy's gas. A 2σ upper limit indicates that the true value is very unlikely to be higher than the quoted threshold. Even when accounting for uncertainties in the calibration methods, the most conservative limit remains 12+log(O/H)<6.95, making CR3 the most metal-poor galaxy identified at cosmic noon. The galaxy also appears to contain very little dust. Researchers measured a Lyα/Hα flux ratio of 13.9 ± 2.5, a result that suggests negligible dust attenuation, meaning very little of the galaxy's light is being absorbed or scattered by cosmic dust. Because dust is usually produced by earlier generations of stars, this finding further supports the idea that CR3 has experienced very little chemical enrichment. Further analysis using spectral energy distribution modelling, a technique that compares observed light with theoretical models, suggests that CR3 contains an extremely young stellar population only around 2 million years old. The modelling, which used Population III stellar templates, also indicates the galaxy has a stellar mass of approximately 6.1 × 10⁵ M⊙. The symbol M⊙ represents one solar mass, or the mass of the Sun. One of the key questions raised by the discovery is how such a chemically primitive galaxy could exist in a universe that had already spent billions of years producing heavier elements. To investigate this, the researchers examined CR3's surroundings. Their analysis suggests the galaxy may lie in a slightly underdense environment, with a density contrast of roughly δ ≈ −0.12. An underdense region contains less matter and fewer galaxies than average. The team suggests that this relative isolation may have helped preserve pockets of pristine gas. Metal-rich material expelled from nearby galaxies may never have reached CR3, while the lower rate of galaxy mergers and interactions could have slowed the mixing of enriched gas into the system. If future observations confirm these findings, CR3 could provide some of the strongest evidence yet that first-generation star formation continued well after the epoch of reionization. Such a result would challenge the conventional view that pristine star formation ended by z ≳ 6 and suggest that small pockets of metal-free gas survived much longer than previously thought. Researchers stress that more observations will be needed to determine the galaxy's true nature. Future spectroscopic studies with higher resolution and better signal quality could help confirm whether CR3 is genuinely hosting Population III star formation. The discovery is also expected to encourage searches for other similar galaxies, which could help astronomers better understand how the first stars formed and how galaxies evolved in the early universe. Source: Tsinghua University, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "I think in the immediate absence of a partner to apply relief" In the words of Sterling Archer... "Phrasing!"
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      HidekoYamamoto94 earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • One Month Later
      timbobit earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      nates earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rookie
      dorf went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      454
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      161
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      107
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      83
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!