Upgrade(s) for 5 years old Desktop


Recommended Posts

Hello,

 

I am looking for advice as I am torn regarding upgrading my main desktop: a HP Pavilion Elite HPE-130. I bought it in 2010 along with Starcraft II.

 

The characteristcs are:

* One Intel i7 860 CPU 2.8 Ghz with 4 physical cores, 8 with Hyoerthreading

* 2 x 1TB Hitachi 7200 HD (more than enough for my usage)

* 1 GeForce GT 640 which was an upgrade from a GT 260

* 8 GB of Ram ( also more than enough for my usage)

* OS: Windows 10

 

Now, in 2016, I find that XCOM 2 is not that running as smoothly as I would like to. It is a bit normal since the recommened Nvidia card would be a 770.

That bothers me because XCOM 2 is really a good game.

 

So, my primary idea would be to change the GT 640 for a GTX 970 or a 980. My secondary idea would be to replace the system drive with a SSD, may be a Samsung 850 500 GB.

But I am concerned that the new graphic card and the new SSD will not work properly in the PC that is nearly 6 years old and I may be better off buying a full config.

 

So, what do you guys think of it? Upgrade Desktop or Buy a new Machine

 

Thank you in advance.

 

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1288144-upgrades-for-5-years-old-desktop/
Share on other sites

An SSD will breathe new life into an old system like that. Do not purchase a GTX 980 for that computer, your CPU will be a bottleneck. If you are going to purchase a new GPU like the 970, or 980, I'd plan a new build around it.

  • Like 3
10 minutes ago, JHBrown said:

An SSD will breathe new life into an old system like that. Do not purchase a GTX 980 for that computer, your CPU will be a bottleneck. If you are going to purchase a new GPU like the 970, or 980, I'd plan a new build around it.

An SSD won't really improve gaming performance all that much, but it will make the system feel much snappier. I wouldn't say that the CPU will always be the bottleneck, it's more dependent on the game, some are far more GPU reliant than they are CPU reliant. It probably makes more sense to get the 970 if you're just upgrading that without everything else.

 

Don't forget to check if your PSU can provide enough power to the new gpu.

I just looked at the tech specs of the machine and I can tell you flat out - your current machine is past it's used by date. 

I'd personally keep the 2 drives (are they SATA drives or IDE?) and then recycle the rest. 

There are few reasons why I say this:
1. The PSU is only 350w - throwing in a 970 or 980 will barely get anything else on your machine running smoothly. 
2. If your 2 drives are SATA, then you can enjoy fast speeds plugged into a new mobo that supports it.
3. 500GB SSD is overkill - best way to do it is grab a 120GB - install Windows 10 and any necessary programs onto that, and keep the 2 drives as data drives for movies/games/tv shows/documents/music etc.
4. I think in the long run - a new PC would be the smarter choice anyway, and then just spend every 2 years upgrading 1 component to keep the machine up to date. 

  • Like 2

also factor in if a 970 generation card will fit into the HP case, you would need at least a 500W PSU also, dont know how easy it is to swap psus on a retail HP with an aftermarket job.

 

PCI-e 3.0 makes a difference of approx 1-2fps and a 9 series will happpily run on pci-e 2.0 with no ill effects. im running a 970 with a 2600k i7/PCI-e 2.0 and saw a massive jump from a 660ti 

 

to be fair the only thing keeping my existing chip & board keeping up is the OC its running probably (sig below), i cant justify to myself to fork out hundreds to get equivalent clock speeds id be looking at a 6700k, then the board, DDR4 etc all mounts up too fast lol :) the 970 is the last upgrade to this system before a new total built in the future. My 3 Evo SSDs will move from this system, thats it probably, and my case, a vintage Lian Li PC-65 15yrish old :) retro!

 

 

Edited by Mando

It all depends on your budget.

UPGRADE:
An SSD is probably the single best upgrade one can do for an old system - the all around snappiness, a no noise is great.
Your video card is horrible and if you plan on getting a new GPU, you will definitely need a new PSU as OEMs put the cheapest POS they can (because its not a selling point)
So - after all is said and done - 
You've got $120 ish for a PSU
$320 for a 970GTX
$140 for a 500 GB 850 EVO

After tax and shipping - you have $600 spent into a 5 year old Hewlett CRAPard

If you have the budget - get a new one

Nice although Texas, ive got all below happily running on a 500W  Corsair CMX, the 970s are pretty power efficient considering their performance. The kit itself yep i agree with everything :) 1080p gaming at ultra is easily possible with a system based on that.

 

i7 2600k @5ghz

8Gb 2133 (2x4)

EVGA 970GTX SSC @1440 core

3x Samsung Evo 120gb SSDs

16x DVDRW

PCI-e x1 Xonar DGX 

3x80mm Zalman fans

1x120mm Zalman fan

 

if he dropped to a 600 or 550, could it drop the cost by $30-$50 maybe and still have a bit of headroom.

 

With my new 970 the no fan spinning until card warms up freaks me out lol, enabled user fan speed in Precision X a hard habit to let go of i suppose :p

 

Edited by Mando

I have check the PSU and it is reported to be 460 W. Which is an odd power for a PSU.

 

ANyway, I have a better idea of what to do with that machine. Now, I need to put price/availibility on the upgrade paths. Prices are likely to be different between the US and France so I need to factor that too

 

Thanks a lot for the answers, guys.

 

7 hours ago, Vykranth said:

Now, in 2016, I find that XCOM 2 is not that running as smoothly as I would like to. It is a bit normal since the recommened Nvidia card would be a 770.

That bothers me because XCOM 2 is really a good game.

So, although you COULD get away with upgrading you should bear in mind that XCOM2 is pretty much brand new and thus has a host of unpatched problems. Totalbuiscuit shed some light on them in his WTF is?: XCOM2, I'd link it but youtube is blocked at work. A quick google search brings up  this: https://www.reddit.com/r/Xcom/comments/44etg2/the_potential_causes_for_performance_issues_with/

I'm not saying you couldn't stand to get some upgrades in your rig, but, if it is solely because of XCOM2... I wouldn't rush it.

2 hours ago, I am Redbeard said:

So, although you COULD get away with upgrading you should bear in mind that XCOM2 is pretty much brand new and thus has a host of unpatched problems. Totalbuiscuit shed some light on them in his WTF is?: XCOM2, I'd link it but youtube is blocked at work. A quick google search brings up  this: https://www.reddit.com/r/Xcom/comments/44etg2/the_potential_causes_for_performance_issues_with/

I'm not saying you couldn't stand to get some upgrades in your rig, but, if it is solely because of XCOM2... I wouldn't rush it.

Well, that was an fascinating and well documented article but, even at minimal settings, XCOM 2 does not feel snappy on my machine.

I do not know if there will be a miracle patch that will optimize the game and make a significant difference. I have been always amazed by some release notes of the NVidia drivers claiming: best drivers for Bla-Bla Game or 25% performance increase in Some-other-game.

That machine has been rock-solid and faithfully working for the last 5.5 years. It depends on the cost at this point: how much for an upgrade than will last one or two years versus a new machine that will last for 5 to 6 years. So, right now, the negotiation is occuring between my wallet and me.

 

14 hours ago, Vykranth said:

I have check the PSU and it is reported to be 460 W. Which is an odd power for a PSU.

 

ANyway, I have a better idea of what to do with that machine. Now, I need to put price/availibility on the upgrade paths. Prices are likely to be different between the US and France so I need to factor that too

 

Thanks a lot for the answers, guys.

 

A no named, generic PSU claiming 460 is probably 350 at best.

The way the crap companies go about getting the ratings is to get a lab nice and chilly, and if that piece of crap spikes for a 1/2 second @ 460W - they'll slap a 460W sticker on it

The reputable companies do the opposite - Seasonic, Corsair, and the old warhorse PC Power & Cooling TurboCool will actually downplay the wattage claims - (a 750W might actually be a 780W)

 

15 hours ago, dafox said:

You should be fine to slap in a 970. Just make sure the variant you get can fit in the space.This is the 260 specs, power wise you should be fine for a 970.

I respectfully disagree based on his entire system.

14 minutes ago, Jared- said:

Time for a new PC. 

I agree. Which is why I only recommended going for an SSD if he wanted to see some day to day performance increase.

1 hour ago, JHBrown said:

I respectfully disagree based on his entire system.

I do get that his system is coming to its end for newer games. But i think he could get away with it one last time. I base this off this CPU generations comparison. The old i7 is a minor bottleneck but will still game at decent fps. Th GT 640 is the bigger bottleneck atm.

 

It does seems he is going for a new build though. He should then get a 980ti and live like a king.

19 hours ago, Anarkii said:

I just looked at the tech specs of the machine and I can tell you flat out - your current machine is past it's used by date. 

I'd personally keep the 2 drives (are they SATA drives or IDE?) and then recycle the rest. 

There are few reasons why I say this:
1. The PSU is only 350w - throwing in a 970 or 980 will barely get anything else on your machine running smoothly. 
2. If your 2 drives are SATA, then you can enjoy fast speeds plugged into a new mobo that supports it.
3. 500GB SSD is overkill - best way to do it is grab a 120GB - install Windows 10 and any necessary programs onto that, and keep the 2 drives as data drives for movies/games/tv shows/documents/music etc.
4. I think in the long run - a new PC would be the smarter choice anyway, and then just spend every 2 years upgrading 1 component to keep the machine up to date. 

Not past due at all. We hit the Moore's law limit. Maybe a 30 to 40% difference for cpu for a new i7 and 25% for a new i5. A new power supply and a video card should be plenty for an i7.

 

Unless this user does more than run a few games every now and then there is no point to replacing. Now if it was a 2009 era i3... I would agree

At this point, Dafox, given the answers, I am indeed more inclined to buy a new machine but I am still undecided.

 

I have looked online to check the price on some premade configs and separate parts. It depends on the price: I ended up with a 1750 Euros full config on Amazon.fr. Hp.Fr sells a Envy Phoenix at 2000 Euro

 

No premade configs has all the things I would like and I do not feel confident in build my own machine: I am very clumsy, changing a gfx card, I can do that, Changing a CPU, I have done one time in my 20 years carreer and I felt like it was open heart surgery.

 

There is a shop I will check tomorrow to see if they have the hardware ready at disposal.

On 07/02/2016 at 0:53 PM, dafox said:

You should be fine to slap in a 970. Just make sure the variant you get can fit in the space.This is the 260 specs, power wise you should be fine for a 970.

Not with a 350W HP PSU he wont. I wager a pint of beer it wont even post with No VGA error.

The minimum PSU reqs by Nvidia and all makers is 500W minimum with at least 32A on the 12v rail, a 360W generic HP PSU wont be anywhere near that requirement.

 

http://support.hp.com/us-en/document/c01959716

44 minutes ago, Mando said:

Not with a 350W HP PSU he wont. I wager a pint of beer it wont even post with No VGA error.

The minimum PSU reqs by Nvidia and all makers is 500W minimum with at least 32A on the 12v rail, a 360W generic HP PSU wont be anywhere near that requirement.

 

http://support.hp.com/us-en/document/c01959716

Thats not his PC variant, so yes you are right a 350w HP special wont run much. His came with a GT 260 from factory which means the PSU is good enough for that card so it would handle a 970 no probs.

 

5 hours ago, Vykranth said:

At this point, Dafox, given the answers, I am indeed more inclined to buy a new machine but I am still undecided.

 

I have looked online to check the price on some premade configs and separate parts. It depends on the price: I ended up with a 1750 Euros full config on Amazon.fr. Hp.Fr sells a Envy Phoenix at 2000 Euro

 

No premade configs has all the things I would like and I do not feel confident in build my own machine: I am very clumsy, changing a gfx card, I can do that, Changing a CPU, I have done one time in my 20 years carreer and I felt like it was open heart surgery.

 

There is a shop I will check tomorrow to see if they have the hardware ready at disposal.

List your wants and needs we can come up with a build and you can take that to a local PC shop.

59 minutes ago, dafox said:

List your wants and needs we can come up with a build and you can take that to a local PC shop.

Basically:

- One Intel i7 CPU (6700K for example)

- 8 Gb of Ram

- 500 Gb SSD System Drive (Samsung 850 for example)

- 1 Tb SSHD or HD Data drive

- One GeForce 970 or 980

- the motherboard that goes with these

- the PSU that goes with these

- the case that goes with these (black)

 

 

 

Little update on the existing machine: I confirm that the PSU is indeed 460 W: it is written on it but there is only one alimentation cable available for the GPU so 970 cards that requires two 6-pins alimentaion cables are a no-no unless the PSU is replaced too. I am now thinking about going to a 950: it should give a good performance improvment over the 640 while being much more afordable. Prices for 950 are hovering around 180 € while the 970s are roughly 350 €.

 

In the end, it was a good idea for me to ask for suggestion here. Thanks, guys.

 

 

 

On 2/7/2016 at 6:32 AM, Vykranth said:

I am looking for advice as I am torn regarding upgrading my main desktop: a HP Pavilion Elite HPE-130. I bought it in 2010

6 hours ago, Vykranth said:

Basically:

- One Intel i7 CPU (6700K for example)

- 8 Gb of Ram

- 500 Gb SSD System Drive (Samsung 850 for example)

- 1 Tb SSHD or HD Data drive

- One GeForce 970 or 980

- the motherboard that goes with these

- the PSU that goes with these

- the case that goes with these (black)

Good topic.  If you're more than 2 or 3 generations behind... you're probably better off buying major components and basically starting over. Things have advanced so much over the years.

 

I went from a system I built in 2009 with an Intel Core2Quad Q8300... to an Intel 4790K in 2015.  That, of course, required a new motherboard and new RAM.

 

Even though I kept the same case, power supply and all my SSDs and hard drives... the "guts" of the system were completely replaced with modern components.  

 

There's only so much you can "upgrade" before you need to start replacing major components.

 

 

You are still talking about that GTX 970 heh!:/:huh: As I recommended before, if you want a GTX 970 or 980, you should opt for a new build. I doubt that power supply you have even provided enough amps on the 12v rail in the first place. You should  be fine running a GTX 950 with that power supply. The recommended system power is 350W. The GTX 950 will be a substantial improvement over the GPU you have now. I have one in an HTPC, and it is a stellar performer with games on our Samsung TV at 1080.

Nobody here has mentioned this yet, but a GTX 260 uses PCIe 2.0. We're now up to PCIe 3.0. If you stick a new video card into that slot, absolute best case scenario is that it will run at half the speed, since PCIe 3.0 lane bandwidth is 985 MB/s compared to 500 MB/s. This is assuming that the card actually works since PCIe 2.1 broke backwards compatibility with a higher power draw, an old 2.0 slot may not actually provide enough base power to even boot.

 

You might be hobbled already, since the version of the 640 with the GK107 chip uses PCIe 3.0. You can find out which actual chip is inside with GPU-Z. I would expect that your version of the 640 is using either the GF116 core, or the GK208 core. A 640 is probably the best video card that motherboard can handle.

 

In the absolute minimum case, an SSD will, in fact, do wonderful things for load times. There was a while when games still put useful information on loading screens, but no one with an SSD would ever see it.

 

Anything over that will require a new computer.

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • This is why science is the only path to truth. It isn't rigid in its beliefs, rather it changes its views based on scientific discoveries.
    • A 13 billion year old secret about our Universe's origin was revealed by Sayan Sen Image by Pascal Küffer via Pexels Researchers at the Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik (MPIK) in Heidelberg had recreated a key chemical reaction from the early universe, producing results that could change scientists' understanding of how the first stars formed. The study focused on the helium hydride ion (HeH⁺), which is widely regarded as the first molecule to form in the universe. Scientists believe HeH⁺ appeared around 380,000 years after the Big Bang, when the universe had cooled enough for electrons and atomic nuclei to combine into neutral atoms in a period known as recombination. This marked the beginning of chemistry in the cosmos. Immediately after the Big Bang about 13.8 billion years ago, the universe was extremely hot and dense. As it expanded and cooled, hydrogen and helium became the dominant elements. Once neutral helium atoms formed, they could react with ionised hydrogen nuclei, or protons, to create helium hydride ions. Although simple in structure, HeH⁺ played an important role in the young universe. It was the first step in a chain of reactions that eventually produced molecular hydrogen (H₂), a molecule made up of two hydrogen atoms and now the most abundant molecule in the universe. Molecular hydrogen later became a key ingredient in the formation of the first stars. At the time, the universe had entered a phase often called the cosmological "dark age." Matter had become transparent to light following recombination, but there were still no stars or galaxies producing visible light. Several hundred million years would pass before the first stars appeared. For those first stars to form, large clouds of gas had to collapse under their own gravity. To do that, the gas needed to cool by releasing energy. While hydrogen atoms can help with this process at high temperatures, they become less effective below about 10,000 degrees Celsius. Molecules can continue the cooling process by releasing energy through rotational and vibrational motions. Scientists have long considered HeH⁺ a potentially important coolant because of its comparatively large dipole moment, a property that describes how electric charge is distributed within a molecule and allows it to release energy efficiently. The amount of helium hydride present in the early universe may therefore have influenced how easily the first stars could form. At the same time, HeH⁺ was constantly being destroyed. Under primordial conditions, its main destruction mechanisms were recombination with free electrons and chemical reactions with hydrogen atoms. These reactions ultimately helped produce molecular hydrogen, linking the formation and destruction of HeH⁺ to the chemistry that shaped the early universe. For many years, theoretical studies suggested that reactions between HeH⁺ and hydrogen atoms would become much slower at low temperatures. Scientists believed there was an energy barrier along the reaction pathway that reduced the chances of the reaction taking place in the cold conditions of the early universe. The new study suggests otherwise. To investigate the process, researchers recreated a closely related reaction using deuterium, a naturally occurring isotope of hydrogen that contains one proton and one neutron in its nucleus. When HeH⁺ collides with deuterium, it forms an HD⁺ ion and a neutral helium atom. This allows scientists to study the reaction in a controlled way while closely mimicking the behaviour of the original reaction involving hydrogen. The experiments were carried out at the Cryogenic Storage Ring (CSR) at MPIK, a specialised facility designed to recreate conditions similar to those found in space. Researchers stored HeH⁺ ions in the 35-metre storage ring for up to 60 seconds at temperatures just a few kelvins above absolute zero and merged them with a beam of neutral deuterium atoms. By adjusting the speeds of the two particle beams, the team measured how the reaction rate changed with collision energy, which is directly related to temperature. The researchers found that the reaction rate remains almost constant as temperatures decrease. In other words, the reaction does not slow down at low temperatures as earlier models predicted. “Previous theories predicted a significant decrease in the reaction probability at low temperatures, but we were unable to verify this in either the experiment or new theoretical calculations by our colleagues,” explained Dr Holger Kreckel of MPIK. “The reactions of HeH⁺ with neutral hydrogen and deuterium therefore appear to have been far more important for chemistry in the early universe than previously assumed,” he continued. According to the researchers, the reaction appears to be barrierless, meaning there is no energy obstacle preventing it from taking place efficiently even at very low temperatures. The findings support recent theoretical work led by physicist Yohann Scribano, whose group identified an error in a widely used potential energy surface, a mathematical model used to describe how the energy of a system changes during a chemical reaction. The error appears to have caused previous studies to significantly underestimate reaction rates under primordial conditions. The new calculations closely match the experimental results. Together, they suggest that helium chemistry in the early universe may need to be re-evaluated. Because molecules such as HeH⁺ and molecular hydrogen played an important role in cooling primordial gas clouds, the findings could help scientists build more accurate models of how the first stars formed. By showing that helium hydride was likely destroyed more efficiently than previously thought, the study offers new insight into the chemical processes that shaped the universe during its earliest stages and helped set the conditions for the emergence of the first stars. Source: Max-Planck Institute, EDP Sciences 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.
    • "What an interesting smell you've discovered"
    • It could EASILY be 70 for the base game BUT + lots of FOMO to make it up to 100-120, like a few days Early Access, online money, pre-order bonus cars, weapons, missions, clothing, avatars or profile stuff, etc... And still WAY TOO MANY people would buy those and make Rockstar insane money.
    • Just to understand: your solution to getting rid of an online password manager is...another online password manager?
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      DrWankel earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      DrWankel earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      164
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      92
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!