Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
No, I wouldn't invest any more money into it.
Well, I guess you still can reuse parts like PSU, case, storage and possibly cooler.
And the GPU.
It's not a system most people would be interested dumping money in, so that's going to be an overwhelming no I expect.
But devil's advocate, the point of upgrades is to improve performance, that's it. If the price is dirt cheap and you only play older games, then a 580 would get you some additional performance over a 370. So maybe. I guess the question is, how much is it, and what are your expectations for the upgrade?
However, for $105 you can get an RX 590 G.M.E.[www.newegg.com], which is a little more powerful than the RX 580 (3%) and consumes a little less electricity (10 fewer watts) for just $104, so I'd recommend that instead.
You're well past due for a processor upgrade too though. I'd say buy an FX 8320. It'll only cost you $34 to buy one used on ebay[www.ebay.com] and it should be compatible with your motherboard[www.userbenchmark.com].
If it even just makes sure the computer gets enough life support to last another year, I'd suppose the cost of the upgrade would be absorbed by the amount of money you save building your next full platform upgrade with newer and better components. I mean, it's only $140 for those two parts. Any wholly new computer is going to cost a fair amount more than that, except maybe an N100 based mini P.C., and the integrated graphics on an N100 aren't so great compared to a 580.
The G.P.U. is garbo. at this point. Doesn't meet minimum spec. for new games.
but the cpus low ipc is going to choke any game, it will not be able to max the gpu
and do not put a fx8 or 100+w cpu in the board, it may start on fire
msi used junk mosfets on the am3 boards, without any thermal protection or sensors
they will burn and ignite when they get too hot
imho safe for a better pc
a new i3 or any ryzen cpu is better than the fx8-9
At this point, I wouldn't bother dumping much money into anything older than Intel's 8th generation platform/AMD's Ryzen 2000 series (which by extension means a Ryzen 1000 series is okay to invest in since AM4 gets you above that point).
Why those CPUs? Just my opinion, but reason for it is those are the official minimum specifications for Windows 11, and unless Windows 10 gets an extension (it honestly may), that's the minimum you want to be at. Yeah, yeah, there's workarounds, but some stuff (Riot's stuff using Vanguard anti-cheat as one example) will mandate stuff like secure boot and TPM 2.0 present and enabled to run under Windows 11 (but not Windows 10), and while that's not yet widespread, the risk was always there that using unsupported hardware under Windows 11 might encounter such issues eventually, and there's already some.
And those CPUs are honestly aging themselves. so that's just where I happen to draw the line. I see the "quad core era" from the 7th generation and older as not worth putting any further money into. Too slow to be worth it, can't go higher on cores (unless you're on a Core i3 or something).
Now for clarity, this doesn't mean I see such hardware unusable. If you already have it, and it's meeting expectations, don't upgrade it "just because". I'm a firm believer in using something as long as it's sufficient. But continuing to use it and investing money into it further are two different things. Much older stuff, such as DDR3 era stuff (Haswell and older, AMD FX and older) seems like burning money to me at this point.
Graphics cards and storage are fair game to a point though since they can be carried forward. But the appeal of something like an RX 580 is likely it's low cost, because it's definitely low performance now (plus or minus the GTX 1060). At $90, there's an argument if you use it for another year or two on Windows 10 with that platform (or carry it to a new one for a short while), you got your money out of it anyway though.
Pretty much agree with this.
I wouldn't do it because I see the platform as a sunk cost, and I see the GPU as too low to be carried forward to something new.
But if it's all you can afford, it improves performance somewhat, and you use it with a platform change in a year or few, and then upgrade from it, is it a waste at $90? No. It's slow, but it's not tied to the platform entirely, and it's better than the R7 370 you're on now at any rate.
If it's older then Ryzen, it's not going to.run games well nor is it worth putting anymore money into. You might as well have a Core 2 Quad at this point.
Build a new PC
Who's talking about Cyberpunk? All I mentioned is new games. Cyberpunk is known to be especially demanding. That's what makes it a good benchmarking game. However, that also makes it an outlier.
Second, an FX 8320 gets a 3DMark Fire Strike Physics Score of 6460, which renders it comparable to an i5 4690[technical.city] (which scores 6630). It's less than 3% weaker by that metric, which is an acceptable margin of error, and I would suppose Fire Strike Physics is the closest benchmark to an actual gaming workload.
So why's that important? Well, look at the recommended specs. for Tekken 7. That's a pretty recent game. It's an i5 4690 with a GTX 1060, and an RX 580 beats a 1060[www.techspot.com] in terms of performance quite firmly.
All I'm saying is that an 8320 will bring the system back up to a threshold of usability for at least some recent games, and it's only going to cost $34 for just the processor, rather than $100 (or more) for a C.P.U., R.A.M. and motherboard swap. A $100 upgrade has to do much more for you than t $34 upgrade to be worthwhile.
And it's really more like $60+shipping (so let's call it at $70) used. That's the cheapest buy it now price for a used and working RX 580 8gb version on ebay right now.[www.ebay.com] It's missing a screw, and will probably sell quickly 'cause there are 22 watchers in the past 24 hours.
Also, the secondhand market is volatile and dicey. I only feel comfortable mentioning the 3820 'cause there's more than 10 in stock and you can probably get your money back with ebay and paypal's money back guarantees if it's D.O.A.
In terms of new cards[www.amazon.com], typically the next card down is a GTX 1030, and we don't need benchmarks to know that the 1030 is further down the stack than the 1060 'cause it's a lower end model in the same generation. I couldn't possibly recommend a 1030 since it doesn't bring the computer in spec. with anything. Maybe if there was an in-between step between the 1030 and the 580 at an acceptable price, I'd recommend that, but there isn't really.
The only question regarding an 8320 is if it's good enough to get your $34's worth out of it before you resort to a full platform upgrade, and that's a pretty low threshold to beat. Forestalling an upgrade at least a year is probably going to save you $50, since a year's worth of advancement is worth at least a tier's worth of performance. At the very least you want your system to be good enough to run palworld
Palworld has the lowest C.P.U. requirement of any popular three-dimensionally rendered game this year. It only requests a Core i5-3570K. However, an FX 6300 isn't even quite there. Whereas the Fire Strike score of the 3570k is 6070, an FX 6300 is only 4900.[technical.city]. A 20% difference in performance is enough to constitute a whole performance tier's worth.
Similarly the difference in performance between a 1050 and an R7 370 is something like 3%[technical.city]. So really, I'm not so sure an R7 370 is better than nothing. It might just be good enough for palworld, since that is under a rounding threshold, but only just barely that if so. Everything else wants more in the way of performance.
Maybe I'd worry more about bottlenecks if there was something like a GTX 1050 ti for $80 (or maybe even much less, but $80 is halfway between a 1030 and a 580, so it sounds reasonable), but really the RX 580 is the cheapest card I can recommend buying, bottlenecked or not. Thus I'm not so concerned that it has somewhat of a bottleneck, so long as it reaches the necessary performance threshold, which I think it does.
Anyway, so long as you have at least mentioned cyberpunk yourself, it's worth noting the minimum spec. for that is an RX 580 (and a 6th gen intel i7).
Cyberpunk 2077
Helldivers 2
Mount and blade bannerlord
City Skylines 2
Starfield
Payday 3
The FX8350 and i5 4690 cannot meet the minimum requirements.
RX580 kidna do (1080p)
I mean the system is not really balanced.
Also, the FX8350 requires an aftermarket cooler. We don't know what the OP has.
If it's $34 for the CPU and $70 for the GPU, it's actually pretty close to a B450 motherboard with a cheap 16GB of RAM and a used Ryzen 5 or Ryzen 3. The current GPU might be junk by today's standards, but it can probably at least run these games at 900p or 720p. There is no point looking for new GPUs at this price.
Pallworld seems to be able to use a maximum of 6 CPU cores, which means it shouldn't be able to use all 8, but since they have one FPU shared between 2, I don't know how that will work, but there is certainly performance left on the table?
If i use the cpu and gpu you recommended, it will bottleneck