Graphics card to give me a performance kick, but without a bottleneck

[TerryWogan]

Hey guys.

I'm running a two-year-old system (actually an OC'd bundle bought from OCUK), consisting of a Pentium Dual Core e3500 2.4GHz clocked to 2.6, 4GB of RAM, and a RADEON HD 3850 X2 1024 MB dual chip card (512MB for each processor).

Now, I'm realistic - I don't have a SSD installed, so I know that's already a bit of a performance inhibitor, but I plan to build an entirely new system towards the end of the year when money is less tight with SSD, a couple of high-end cards, i7, etc.

In the meantime, I want to know if there's a decent card that can replace my 3850 X2 (budget of £100-£200) that will give me a reasonably significant performance boost until I build an entirely new system. I realise simply going out and buying the best card around isn't going to do me any favours because the rest of my system is creaking a little. So, is there anything that fits the bill? Should I just wait it out?

I mainly play StarCraft 2 and I get a fair bit of slowdown during intense firefights. I run it on Ultra at 1080p. It's perfectly playable, but like I say, it can slow down. Will a better card than my 3850 X2 rectify this to some degree? To be honest, I've kinda taken my finger off the pulse with regards to graphics cards, so any advice would be very welcome! I mean, just how outdated is the 3850 X2 at this point? I think it came out in 2007?

Thanks a lot!

 

[Tute]

There are cards out there but unless you're unhappy with your current performance i'd sit tight and upgrade it all in one go.

If not, then I wouldn't blow all the budget at once, consider something like a GTX460 or HD5850, possibly off the MM?

 

[chrisarm]

Gotta say, once I get my mobo back from being fixed it's the 6950 all the way

 

[Skellig]

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-103-MS&groupid=701&catid=56&subcat=411

But if you're patient and can wait till next year, you'll have extra money to spend on your new rig.

The 3850X2 isn't that bad but both your CPU and GPU are limiting your performance.

And I'd recommend not buying a SSD just for gaming. Even at the end of the year. Save that money to put into your GPU or CPU pot. There's plenty of fast HDDs there.

 

[TerryWogan]

Thanks for the advice guys - I think I will wait it out!

 

[TerryWogan]

Out of interest though - why don't you recommend a SSD? I planned on one for my OS install/frequently used apps and games. According to the Windows 7 "system rater" thing, my hard drive is my limiting factor!

 

[yrthilian]

Well i am not fully upto date on all the HDD's and proper performance
but for me SSD is far to expensive compared to some other solutions out there.

For example i just changed out my Laptop's HDD for a hybrid drive.
It is the Seagate XT 500GB i got it for about 200euro and to be honest ever since the new firmware came out for it i have noticed a difference in performance.

The drive has a 4GB SSD (note you cannot actually touch that part it is used to load the programs you use the most quicker) and then it has 500GB normal disk space.

All in all i have noticed a big difference from the normal HDD's and the hybrid drive. and the cost difference was not that much. I would suggest looking at that option before going fully SSD.

I too was looking at a GF and was wondering what would be best to go for. As i have (bows head in shame) ATI X1600 still and well now i NEED something better. But was wondering what i should go for ATI or Nvida? I tend to lean towards ATI to be honest.

 

[Skellig]

Out of interest though - why don't you recommend a SSD? I planned on one for my OS install/frequently used apps and games. According to the Windows 7 "system rater" thing, my hard drive is my limiting factor!

Well, if you're looking for a noticeable improvement in read and write times across the board for general everyday usage then a SSD as your main boot will be a good idea. So if that's the route you're planning then go for it.

For gaming, you'll only see any performance differences in load times.

So I reckon the money saved to buy a graphics card that gives you 20+ FPS increase is better than the 10 seconds less wait time for the game to load.

When we start see 120gb SSDs selling for under £100, I'd recommend them in a heartbeat. Just too expensive for the quick boot and load advantages at the moment in my opinion.

 

[mattjd]

Starcraft 2 prefers Nvidia cards. So if its the main game you play then you want to get yourself an Nvidia card.

Windows system rater is a load of ball and storage does not effect FPS.

 

[JoeFX69]

Out of interest though - why don't you recommend a SSD? I planned on one for my OS install/frequently used apps and games. According to the Windows 7 "system rater" thing, my hard drive is my limiting factor!

SSD's are going through a transition stage at the moment, so recommending one would be akin to telling you to buy an iPhone 4 now for example even though the iPhone 5 is just months away.

a lot of the big hitters have released or are about to release new drives made with cheaper memory and faster controllers, and take better advantage of the SATA 6GB interface.

Intel and Crucial will be makes to look out for soon. Until then, save pennies, dont spend them.