Okay so my pc is a hand-me-down form my dad and i want it to run a wee bit faster. I have a pentium4 processor, 512mb of ram, 128mb video card. Now should i upgrade my Pc's Motherboard so i can use higher processors liek AMD and dual core (which would require me to buy new RAM and a new Video card) OR just stick with my processor and upgrade my ram and video card as needed? I want this computer to last 2-6 years, so please tell me what the best path to take is
You already made a thread about this. If you required further help you should probably post in that one. EDIT: BTW you need a new video card anyway since your current one isn't that good.
I can't remember what your current specs are, or where the other thread is. It depends on what you have. You won't be able to make use of a fast graphics card with a slow processor, and vice versa.
Pentium 4 is a very good processor to begin with, stick with it. The only thing you need that will speed up your gamming is a faster video card. The minimum is an ATI 9600 pro 256 mb (less than $90.00), that runs every game I throw at it. (there are other higher end video card's but more expensive). Your 512 mb memory is fine if you have windows xp, for vista you need at least 1gb. Pentium 4 is in the midrange as far as processors go and will run every game available. You only need a dual core processor if you want to speed up video encoding programs (intel coreduo is very good in that area). Dual cores won't speed up your game where you will notice a difference. Just make sure when you buy a video card you get the right one for your motherboard (agp or pci) I have an intel coreduo 6300 1gb ram and a AMD semprom 2800 512mb ram, both have ati 9600 pro video cards. Both play the latest games without problems.It's all about the video card in my opinion.
Ok look here. The best Pentium 4(Which happens to be a extreme edition, I doubt he has that one) only manages 126 FPS, while the worst Core 2 Duo manages 166. Now tell me how it doesn't matter in gaming. P.S. The game tested was Call of Duty 2. EDIT: The reason you get the same performance is because your video card is not up to it. Back in 2003, when that card was released, it played UT 2003 at 32 FPS on the highest settings. I really doubt you can run any modern games on it.
But you see, i can already run newer games, i play command and conquer 3 and even BF2 on medium setting. My main reason not to upgrade is money, i am 16 and i have no job, my only income is allowance and christmas so my cash is very limited
But you see, i can already run newer games, i play command and conquer 3 and even BF2 on medium setting. My main reason not to upgrade is money, i am 16 and i have no job, my only income is allowance and christmas so my cash is very limited
Bringing a bit of realism to the conversation, I'm not sure how you'd tell 160fpsfrom 130fps, but in newer games, that difference is bigger, and the numbers are lower. There are two limits on the frame rate for games, what I call the 'soft limit' , the capability of your graphics card - that usually means you can raise/lower the detail settings to get a higher or lower frame rate, and the 'hard limit', that even if you turn the settings down, you will not go above. That's set by the processor. If a certain game at 1024x768 High detail only bags you 50fps, but your hard limit is 70fps, you could turn it down to 800x600 Medium detail and get 70fps. Going down to low detail won't get you any extra fps this way. The 9600 Pro is a snail compared even to generation-old budget cards like a 7300GS, but then running C&C3 and BF2 is a reasonable achievement, and shows just how slow integrated graphics are because they can't! Some other modern games, however, are not so great. You wouldn't play Stalker, FEAR or Supreme Commander too well on that Graphics card.
I know, but in quite a few cases, it still doesn't. It does however have a massive impact in Supreme Commander. Running the replays at +10 murders your frame rate due to the CPU. I was able to view a 70 minute replay at that speed in about 14 minutes, it took someone with an X2 4200+ about 19!
