Pred's Big Summer PC Upgrade Adventure! *UPDATE* It's Dead Jim

Pages

I'd wanted to, at the very least, get a fat new HD this summer, something in the range of a nice 500GB baby that'll keep me from asking about how much space I have left over again for a nice long time. Something to become the new Master HD for my PC.

The thing is, i'd really, really like to avoid having to wipe my master HD and start anew on another. There's just enough crap i've collected that I don't want to have to deal with burning it all off, if possible.

So i'm wondering if there are any tricks or programs that would let me move the contents of my current HD over to the new one whole so I don't have to do a reinstall.

If not, I may just use the new one as a new slave drive.

Some retail hard drive kits come with a utility to do this for you, OEM drives though will not but the different drive manufacturers may have utilities on their site for download to enable this (Maxtor and WD do). I'd have to look for other freebies...

Here's a few free utilities I found via google:
Easeus Disk Copy
MaxBlast (not sure if it works for non-Maxtor destination drives)
Acronis Migrate Easy 7 (15 day trial - Not sure if you'll have to buy it to get it work)

Good luck!

*Bump*

So, i'm renaming this thread and reviving it, because a large chunk of Pred's Summer cash is going towards three things. A new HD, a new MoBo, and a new Processor. Currently, i'm just hoping to get some good preliminary advice before I inadvertantly destroy me PC and begin crying.

I've had my eye on a nice, shiny new AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual-Core processor, probably the 3800+, but i'm wondering if I would be just as well served by getting a plain Athlon 64.

Moreover, if I get a new processor that means a new MoBo, and i'd like to make my life much easier by not having to deal with getting a Motherboard that is not compatible with my current Graphics Card and RAM. I'm only mildly experienced with building PCs (I did help build my current one, but i'm not exactly proficient with these things) so i'm wondering how often, if at all, there are problems changing RAM and graphics cards from one Motherboard to another. I'd very much like it if my 9800XT didn't suddenly become useless.

Basically, I just need someone to hold my hand through the process of finding, purchasing, and putting toegher what I need. I can promise cookies.

Also, thanks Eezy, I think that 3rd one is exactly what i'm looking for.

Now is a great time to be on the look for a new processor! AMD is slashing their prices big time.

My main concern right this moment is that you're going to be limited as to which motherboards you can buy if you want to retain your AGP video card. Most mobo's are PCI-Express now, especially if you're looking at going dual-core.

Certis just pointed out the one big thing that I noticed in all that.

Your AGP video card will really restrict your motherboard choices, and going with a motherboard with an AGP slot will severely limit any future video card upgrade you may want to go for.

As for your cpu's, the 3800+ is kind of a bargain as far as dual-core processors go.

And ram.. well, what you go with there again depends on what motherboard you end up with. If you get one of the newish socket AM2 boards, you'll want DDR2. If you go with regular old socket 939, then any old DDR400 will do just fine, and that stuff's all over the place if it's not what you already have in your current setup.

*edit*

Were I in your position, I'd give some thought to the barebones deal that Cartoonin just posted a thread about.

I've had my eye on a nice, shiny new AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual-Core processor, probably the 3800+, but i'm wondering if I would be just as well served by getting a plain Athlon 64.

I moved from an Athlon 64 3200+ to that 3800+ X2, and the difference is noticeable. I can set one thing going, and click on something else, and Windows does not hesitate to start the second process. Also, I can download and still play games or do whatever, the two cores really handle that kind of work well.

Overall the system is noticeably faster. I got Socket 939 and that's got a good number of faster cpus I can go to, and still uses cheap RAM. I have 2GB now.

One issue you'll have is that the X2 compatible boards will have a PCI-E graphics slot. So that's $300 or so for a new high-end graphics card. But omgzors, is it ever worth it.

I think I could swing a new Graphics card, although i'll need to figure out what's the equivalent to my 9800XT these days, or at least a reasonable upgrade. For example, this one's cheaper than teh X1900, but i'm going to imagine that the X1900 is a better card.

Mind you, ATI's treated me well with their cards through time, so i'd like to stick with them.

Also, I like the Barebones system idea, but honestly, i've already got a barebones one here already, and the more I think about it, and the more reviews I read, the more I want the 3800+.

The 7600GS is the price/performance 'sweet spot' right now, I think. I just got a passively-cooled one for a silent PC I'm building.

I'm gonna add my own question on your thread if you don't mind, Pred, because I'm having the same questions, and am looking at some of the same answers.

When I built my machine last September, I didn't anticipate that the 939's were going to disappear so soon. Not that I regret it, but its rushed my timetable alittle. I'm only running a Athlon 64 3000, so I feel like I should upgrade the processor in the next month or two in order to prolong the life of the box (and stave off the inevitable AM2 mobo/cpu upgrade for as long as possible). I was thinking the 3800 or 4000, or making the jump to the 3800 X2.

But in terms of my use (games, obviously), I'd probably be better off upgrading my MSI X800 256MB card, right? Both might be abit much for my budget, though.

This thread makes me feel like an idiot for going with a Socket 754 last year instead of 939. Damn you Shuttle!

I do have the Athlon 64 3000+ (Not Sempron), but I think I read at the time it was better to go 754 or something. Doh. And I have an AGP card too, the X800XL. I'd like to upgrade but it looks like I'd be better off with a new system.

Please, please kill AGP for good. I don't want to see an AGP-Express in the future, this hopping around is killing me

Haakon7 wrote:

(and stave off the inevitable AM2 mobo/cpu upgrade for as long as possible).

Don't sweat this too much - the AM2 is more of a way of staying in the memory mainstream than increasing performance.

Prederick wrote:

I've had my eye on a nice, shiny new AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual-Core processor, probably the 3800+, but i'm wondering if I would be just as well served by getting a plain Athlon 64.

Moreover, if I get a new processor that means a new MoBo, and i'd like to make my life much easier by not having to deal with getting a Motherboard that is not compatible with my current Graphics Card and RAM. I'm only mildly experienced with building PCs (I did help build my current one, but i'm not exactly proficient with these things) so i'm wondering how often, if at all, there are problems changing RAM and graphics cards from one Motherboard to another. I'd very much like it if my 9800XT didn't suddenly become useless.

If you're going to upgrade, get an X2. The price difference is simply not that great, and dual-processor is the way things are headed - Nvidia's drivers are already taking advantage of it.

If you do upgrade, the only thing that will probably transfer is your RAM (as long as it is DDR400) - and only if you don't get an AM2 motherboard, which requires DDR2 RAM. Almost all current boards are PCI-Express and that is the way the future is headed. On the plus side, there are cheap cards that are better than your 9800.

Lastly, when you are buying, remember that longevity is your goal. PCs are a lot easier to swallow when you can upgrade piecemeal and the system is good enough to last for a long time.

Aetius wrote:

If you're going to upgrade, get an X2. The price difference is simply not that great, and dual-processor is the way things are headed - Nvidia's drivers are already taking advantage of it.

If you do upgrade, the only thing that will probably transfer is your RAM (as long as it is DDR400) - and only if you don't get an AM2 motherboard, which requires DDR2 RAM. Almost all current boards are PCI-Express and that is the way the future is headed. On the plus side, there are cheap cards that are better than your 9800.

Lastly, when you are buying, remember that longevity is your goal. PCs are a lot easier to swallow when you can upgrade piecemeal and the system is good enough to last for a long time.

Well, long term's the plan. I'm going to make a wild assumption that my hard drive isn't going to be calatimously inconvinienced by this.

Also, while I do like ATI and what they've done for me, and would like to stay loyal, don't just say there are other cards out there, show me man! Give me a name to look for!

I also recommend the X2 3800. I have had one since last year, and my day to day computing is smooooth.
If you can live with with your current video card for a while longer, here is a 939 motherboard that will allow you to upgrade to PCI-E when you are ready.
Can you tell us what your budget is?

Haakon7 wrote:

But in terms of my use (games, obviously), I'd probably be better off upgrading my MSI X800 256MB card, right?

That depends on what resolution you game at, Haakon7. I'm still running an X800 Pro (slightly faster than the normal X800, I think) and I can do 1024x768 with maximum details on almost all games. The only exception is anything that runs on the engine Monolith used for FEAR. That thing is just slow as a dog. In many cases I've also got AF and AA enabled and the speed is still acceptable to me*.

So if you want very high resolution gaming, then a new graphics card is the only way out. If you can still get by at 1024x768 and play with a few option at less-than-max, then rather save your cash. With all the socket, memory and CPU changes happening, now is not an ideal time to upgrade unless you're willing to upgrade all the major stuff.

*I'm a certified graphics whore, so my "acceptable" is usually overkill for the more casual viewer.

Lord_Xan wrote:

So if you want very high resolution gaming, then a new graphics card is the only way out. If you can still get by at 1024x768 and play with a few option at less-than-max, then rather save your cash. With all the socket, memory and CPU changes happening, now is not an ideal time to upgrade unless you're willing to upgrade all the major stuff.

Thanks, Xan.
Mine's not a Pro, but it is PCIe. I was glad I made that decision when I put the bad boy together last year. (You got fooled Swatty.) For a while, I tried to muddle through with 1280x1024, just because that's the native resolution for my LCD. Figured it would be better to stick with that, but when I drop down to 1024x768, its all much smoother. Looks great and most things run in the 40's, except for Oblivion which is in the 20-30 range. I have the exact same problems with FEAR, though. Which is disappointing.

So I'll probably just go for the CPU upgrade. I can live without HDR for the time being. So, what is it 3800 X2?

Hey, Pred, if you want a Athlon 64 3000...

So i'm doing some preliminary research so I can begin to figure out roughly how much i'm going to need to squirrel away for all this, which is looking like around $1200-1500. With the announcement about AM2 boards, I think i'll go for one of those, although that will require new RAM, and IGNORE THE STUPID.

Also, finding a fan and heatsink for the of the X2's is proving a bit difficult. I must be missing something, although i'm beginning to give serious thought to a water-cooling system.

I have a hard time believing there are many boards without built-in sound at this point.

Then I'm entirely missing something. Wildly. Whiffing. What should I be looking for that i'm not?

EDIT: Jesus f**k i'm an idiot. Nevermind. On to the next challenge, matching a cooling system with the CPU. I'm thinking about this one here.

Prederick wrote:

Then I'm entirely missing something. Wildly. Whiffing. What should I be looking for that i'm not?

EDIT: Jesus f**k i'm an idiot. Nevermind. On to the next challenge, matching a cooling system with the CPU. I'm thinking about this one here.

That thing is monsterous. If you've never seen one installed, good lord find yourself some pictures somewhere. It sticks up so high off the motherboard I kind of wonder how it doesn't crack the processor with all the weight hanging that far out into space.

It's one of those things where I know it works well because lots of people use it, but god it makes me nervous just looking at it.

Prederick wrote:

On to the next challenge, matching a cooling system with the CPU. I'm thinking about this one here.

I've heard good things about the Zalman lines. I was thinking of this one when I upgrade my CPU (as if I need any more blue LEDs).

I'm still debating the need for a dual-core, though. Aren't there issues with running some games? I mean, it would be handy to have the multiple thread processing, but is it necessary? Or might it be better to wait for a later gen of the multiple core procs?

That said, the X2 4200+ is only another $60 ahead of the X2 3800, and $70 over the single-core 4000. That's reasonable for what is basically twice the processing power.

Prederick wrote:

Then I'm entirely missing something. Wildly. Whiffing. What should I be looking for that i'm not?

EDIT: Jesus f**k i'm an idiot. Nevermind. On to the next challenge, matching a cooling system with the CPU. I'm thinking about this one here.

I would stay away from that one.. I had a devil of a time trying to get that mounted and fitted into several roomy LARGE tower cases.. its friggin huge! stick with the 80mm or 92mm ones at the most.. for air cooling that sucker is overkill..

Unless you plan on overclocking, I've found the stock fans that come with the retail packages to work great for the newer AMD CPUs. Even in a hot room while playing a game my CPU temp never goes over about 42 degrees Celsius.

Certis wrote:

Unless you plan on overclocking, I've found the stock fans that come with the retail packages to work great for the newer AMD CPUs. Even in a hot room while playing a game my CPU temp never goes over about 42 degrees Celsius.

I'd be with you, but after the fun i've had with my current fan which came with my CPU, i'm incredibly iffy about going with stock. NewEgg's listings for AM2 compatible CPU fans seems to be reasonably short however, but a few others have caught my eye.

Also, i'm still trying to narrow things down on a new Video Card. I know Minase mentioned the 7600GS, but, as I mentioned, ATI hasn't done me wrong yet. Perhaps a nice new X1900 might be worth the price. Most seem to be running for around $300 on NewEgg.com, but i'm wondering if a cheaper X1600 or X1800 might be a smarter idea.

Also, looking at Shuttle's site, i'm giving serious consideration (since i'd be waiting to make all these purchases anyway) to waiting until everyone gets the SN27P2 in stock.

I'm still debating the need for a dual-core, though. Aren't there issues with running some games? I mean, it would be handy to have the multiple thread processing, but is it necessary? Or might it be better to wait for a later gen of the multiple core procs?

Issues with games? I don't think so...Anyone heard of that?

Modern OS's, including Windows, can throw threads at the processor in quantity. They manage that on the OS side. A regular processor then sets up the threads in the various caches and pipelines, and hops from one to another depending on a whole complicated set of rules.

What the dual core stuff does is simply give the hardware two places for threads to land, instead of just one. That means pipelines and caches and rules are simplified. So it's easier for the system to tear through threads.

I notice it most when I ask Windows to do two things at once - play music and play a game, for example, or alt-tab out to do something. That sort of operation is much more smooth with dual core than with single.

Robear wrote:

Issues with games? I don't think so...Anyone heard of that?

I see how they work, but as I understood it, there were issues with various OS's management of the processors themselves? To be more clear, there were issues as they assigned (or failed to assign) threads to individual cores, which lead to crashes?

But, regardless, the fact that you're happy with it is enough assurance for me, Robear. Thanks. I'll definitely be looking at a dual core, then.

Hold off for Core 2 Duo. (also known as Conroe)

The entry level chips should be around $200-$250 and blow the doors off of the X2 3800+.

Anandtech has a comparison of the new top of the line consumer chips here:

http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/sho...

Core 2 Duo is at least ~20% better framerates and has significantly higher minimum framerates.

Also, I moved from a 9600xt to a x800 recently. You will more than likely get the same huge performance boost as I did with the x1600 and then some more with the x1800.

fangblackbone wrote:

Hold off for Core 2 Duo. (also known as Conroe)

This is actually good advice. At least the waiting part is.

If you wait until it shows up, all it means is you have more options. Plus AMD's sudden lack of clear leadership in the gaming performance market might convince them to lower the prices on their chips yet again.

Waiting is really a win/win in this case. I may even go Intel with my own next gaming rig when I do my new upgrade/build next year. We'll see.

So, i'm wondering, is upgrading to an AM2 board really important? As in, will I regret it in a few months if I buy a 939 motherboard? Which, shortly, would be a better use of my money?

A 939 is going to be cheaper all around, but it's a dead end as far as tech goes. It depends on how often you think you'd upgrade, if you're the kind of guy who likes to wait a couple years and replace your mobo/proc/vid all in one go, a 939 would probably do you fine. If you prefer picking up a faster processor once in a while or doing things piece by piece over time, an AM2 would be a better bet since new stuff will continue to come out for it.

Personally, every time I upgrade I tend to replace all the major components with new ones anyways, so I don't worry too much about buying the latest, most expensive brand new tech when I upgrade.

Robear wrote:

Issues with games? I don't think so...Anyone heard of that?

There was an initial rash of games that had multi-core issues (Need for Speed: Most Wanted & Serious Sam 2 for example) but most issues were squashed relatively quickly. The problem can largely be attributed to the use of RDTSC style-timing which is based on internal CPU cycle timers. The problem is that the cycle timers on multi-core machines are not gauranteed to be synchronized so when Windows passes the game application from one core to the next, it could potentially get wildly varying values. AMD has supplied a "Dual Core Optimizer" utility that is supposed to be a blanket cure for all games using the antiquated RDTSC timing model -- I haven't tested it so I can't comment as to it's usefulness.

/tangent

Pred: Wait for the Conroe - regardless of which brand/socket type you buy it'll be cheaper.

Pages