M/board advice needed please

andy_fozzy

andy_fozzy

SPAM Merchant
Suspended / Banned
Messages
7,450
Name
Andy!
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all. Thinking of updating my PC a bit.
I'd start off with my motherboard, as it's very basic. Does the job mind, but is pretty old now.

I've added the below screen shot so you can see what CPU I have;

cpu2-1.jpg


I cannot figure out what socket (?) motherboard I need for my CPU.
Bit embarrassing really as I used to be well up together with computers!!!
I built this thing myself so I should know :$

Any help would be very much appreciated :thumbs:
 
The problem with updating the mobo first is you have to buy for the processor you have now. IMHO, it's best to change mobo/proc/memory all in one go, then you are not linked to the fastest chip that'll fit in your current socket (which is an AM2 by the way). You'd be far better spending £450 in one go on something like:

i7-2600K: £245
Cooler: £45
P67 or Z68 mobo: £100
16G memory: £60

assuming you have a recent power supply. You could even get away with onboard graphics if you're not a gamer (the i7-2600K has a fairly decent graphics processor onboard - certainly enough to run Photoshop). You'll be able to (easily) overclock that to ~4.4GHz and you'll have a machine that'll destroy your current one.

If you want to cut down on that price, trade the i7 for an i5-2500K, only have 8G of memory. DON'T buy an H6x based board - you can't overclock those...

You will also need to factor a move to a 64bit version of Win7 to access the memory (I *think* you can just reuse the same product key you have for Win7 32bit if you can get hold of a Win7 64bit product media).
 
Hi Andy. Thanks for the info.

TBH, I'm starting to wonder if it's really worth upgrading everything. I'm unhappy with the speed of my system, but would like it just a bit quicker!
Maybe just a better GFX card would be an option?
Currently have a Nvidia Geforce 7600GT (256mb) which is knocking on a bit......

Thanks again :thumbs:
 
Don't think you would see much more speed with a new graphics card.

I agree with Andy's suggestions.

If it's cheaper you want, find out how much RAM your mobo can take, then max it out.

Change to Win7 64bit to take advantage of the new RAM.
 
I'd say the most noticeable upgrade you can make is to change the hard drive to a solid state one.

Ebuyers SSD list

I'd go for a 120Gb one but others are doing fine with the cheaper 60Gb option. You still have normal hard drives in there for storage but programs etc load off the SSD and make it fast.

If you upgrade more in the future you can reuse the drive.
 
What editing software do you use? To benefit from any GPU acceleration, it has to be programmed into the software. Photoshop CS4/CS5 only use OpenGL 2.0 for 2D image manipulations (zooming, panning, rotating etc...) which is supported with your 256MByte 7600. It may get a little quicker with a better card, but I'd say you'd get a lot more performance upgrading the CPU (your 5000+ scores 1364 at cpubenchmark.net, an overclocked i7-2600k scores 11100 - notice the factor of ~10 there...).
 
id have to agree with the motherboard, processor and memory route. graphics card wont speed things up very much at all.

its going to be the best route to a faster machine.
 
Do SSD's really make that much of a speed difference?

Andy's suggestion is a good one
 
RobertP said:
I'd say the most noticeable upgrade you can make is to change the hard drive to a solid state one.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure that's going to give you much if it's the processing that's holding you back. If it's disk load times or memory shortage, then maybe. Be aware that some of the smaller SSDs are actually slower than current HDDs (as the smaller ones tend to be half or quarter the channels of the big SSDs).
 
neil_g said:
define speed difference, granted i run an older vertex but boot speeds are negligably faster. apps are certainly snappier to start up.
Click to expand...

I've corrected that for you Neil ;)
 
I'm more thinking of an upgrade that doesn't make what you already have redundant. If you are going to replace the mobo ram and processor then you have a new PC. If you just want your existing one more responsive then SSD will do it.
I'd have rebuilt this one a year ago if I hadn't changed to SSD.

I'll admit I'd like an i7 and may even go for it before too long. If I do I'll be reusing the SSD.

SSD is good at all those little files that keep loading at startup so not only does it boot up quicker, it is actually usable quicker too. I remember leaving my PC for 2 minutes or so after booting to let everything get loaded so when I clicked say firefox it opened straight away. Now with SSD I have email and firefox open within 40 seconds of pressing the power button - and most of that time is watching the bios logo screens not loading windows.
 
SSD has been the best upgrade I've made. Everything is snappier and faster including the boot speeds (and I'm running an older SATA2 system). The 128Gb crucial M4 runs even faster for when I upgrade to SATA 3 - eventually I will.

All down to what you use the PC for though and what you think is slow?

I also considered the upgrade to a new PC buty with Photoshop CS5 64bit now opening in about 4 or 5 seconds (with a few plugins installed) and other apps running very quickly, I now don't see the need.

JD
 
EOS_JD said:
I also considered the upgrade to a new PC buty with Photoshop CS5 64bit now opening in about 4 or 5 seconds (with a few plugins installed) and other apps running very quickly, I now don't see the need.

JD
Click to expand...
But the app only opens once, surely it's the processing that matters (or do you close PS between each image edit?). Once Lightroom is in memory, it's the speed of the processor (and scratch disk) that dictates how smoothly you can run back and fore through images at 1:1. Certainly, if you're applying any effects, it's all processor performance. The difference between a AMD 5000+ and i7-2600K will be night and day here.... For example, I've just done a large content aware fill on a 16 bit raw image. It takes 15 seconds on my machine and has all 8 cores going ~60%-70% CPU utilisation for most of that. I'm sure the same thing would take ages on a 5000+.

If you want to see what a "standard" Photoshop test does, try: http://clubofone.com/speedtest/

The overclocked i7 people are running ~10-11 seconds there.
 
neil_g said:
theres an update of that test over on OCUK with a more realistic large image, CS3 doesnt like that at all lol (cant use more than 4Gb of my 16Gb :()
Click to expand...
Can you post a linky?
 
I think it is more about perception of speed rather than just processing power. I'm considering an upgrade because lightroom can get slow and video editing could be smoother.

I can bring up task manager and see that the processor is maxed out at those times but you know the reason and can live with it or decide to upgrade.

It is all the rest of the time using the PC that SSD has made a big difference - opening programs like email and browsers that don't max out the processor is what you do most of the time, and all that is much quicker.
 
Yes I suppose it depends how you use the PC.
 
RobertP said:
opening programs like email and browsers that don't max out the processor is what you do most of the time, and all that is much quicker.
Click to expand...
See, that's why the perceived increase depends on how you use your PC. On 24/7 here and I open mail once every time I boot the machine (~4-6 weeks at a guess), Lightroom/Photoshop are normally open as is Chrome.

neil_g said:
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18342923

its basically the same test but with a 46mb image.
Click to expand...
9.4GB used by Photoshop after processing and 20 seconds for that image - I'm up to 13.85G used memory after doing that :eek:
 
arad85 said:
9.4GB used by Photoshop after processing and 20 seconds for that image - I'm up to 13.85G used memory after doing that :eek:
Click to expand...

hehe, i think its more of a realistic test for the newer systems. unfortuntately CS3 isnt designed for new systems so mine put out 3 mins 30 something.

which i think raises another point that having an all singing all dancing PC with old software wont do you any favours :lol:
 
Last edited:
neil_g said:
hehe, i think its more of a realistic test for the newer systems. unfortuntately CS3 isnt designed for new systems so mine put out 3 mins 30 something.

which i think raises another point that having an all singing all dancing PC with old software wont do you any favours :lol:
Click to expand...

ha, had to bump an old thread just to say mines down to 22.7s now with CS4 64bit :lol:
 
Well I was 3:30 with a Q6600, 6Gb RAM and scratch disk a 2Tb

Changed trhe scratch disk to my 128Gb SSD (with about 20Gb free) and time was reduced to 2:15.

Maybe I need a new Mobo/CPU and memory though!

:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top