Dolphin, the GameCube and Wii emulator - Forums

Looking to update my rig not only for Wii games but just because its about time that I got some of the new hardware.

Current ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Cpu: AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+ 2.60GHz (Dual core)
Ram 3GB DDR2-800mghz (Single channel)
Storage 160GB SATA2,
GPU NVIDIA GT 240 1g ddr5 version
OS Windows Vista 32 bit
Mobo Foxconn K8M890M2MB-RS2H Socket AM2

After some research it seems my CPU is considered obsolete. but to upgrade I need to replace the board wich means new ram also.

I will be salvaging the case, storage, Optical drive, power-supply (400w). with a budget of $150 usd (The less i spend the better)

p.s I will upgrading the graphic card in January so leave that out of the budget

any suggestions for a strong gaming/emulation platform around that budget.

---

Just throwing out some builds here

from new eggg
ASRock M3A770DE AM3 AMD 770 ATX AMD Motherboard

Team Elite 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1333 (PC3 10600) Desktop Memory Model TED38192M1333HC9DC

AMD Athlon II X2 250 Regor 3.0GHz Socket AM3 65W Dual-Core Desktop Processor ADX250OCGMBOX

Comes to $149.97

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

This build is a cheaper mobo but better processor

Patriot G2 Series PGD34G1333ELK Division 2 Edition Desktop Memory Kit - 8GB (2 x 4GB) PC3-10666, DDR3-1333MHz, 9-9-9-24 CAS Latency, XPM Ready

AMD ADX450WFGMBOX Athlon II X3 450 Triple Core Processor - 3.20GHz, Socket AM3, 1.5MB Cache, Retail w/ Fan

ECS MCP61M-M3 Motherboard - Socket AM3, MicroATX, Audio, GeForce 6150 Graphics, SATA

---

After reavtes 147.98

Between those two, the second one. But I'd say you need better builds overall. I don't know your budget limit tough. I guess the second is the best you"ll get for that amount of money.

Get 4GB of RAM and upgrade that CPU. Triple cores are unnecessary too.

Yeah, get another architecture, like a phenom II if possible.

I could possible add another 50 it would just add another week before i could get all this which is fine

---

So updated build with a higher budget

ASUS M5A97 AMD 9 Series AM3+ Motherboard

AMD HDZ955FBGMBOX Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition Processor

VisionTek 900397 Performance Desktop Memory Kit - 4GB (2x 2GB), PC3-10600, DDR3-1333MHz, 240-pin DIMM, CL9, 1.5V, Non ECC, Unbuffered

Price is $218.00 after rebates, bet i could sell my old stuff (cpu/mobo/ram)for atleast 40 or so pretty easily so that will offset the cost.

---

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/...=A455-3067

link to mobo it didn't want it work

Overclock your current CPU to get more FPS. Upgrading to a Phenom II would not yield much performance or fps. You can do get the same speed as a Phenom II if your overclock your Athlon x2! So, if I were you I'd save the money and go with Intel and never look back again.

(11-29-2011, 07:57 PM)tuanming Wrote: [ -> ]Overclock your current CPU to get more FPS. Upgrading to a Phenom II would not yield much performance or fps. You can do get the same speed as a Phenom II if your overclock your Athlon x2! So, if I were you I'd save the money and go with Intel and never look back again.

Don't know much about intel or i would throw together a build with their setup. AMD seems better per price point. Not that i like one over the other. actually like nvidia GPU's over Radeon. worst case scenario i sell my computer sometime soon and build one from the ground up if it doesn't perform to my liking.

Quote:Upgrading to a Phenom II would not yield much performance or fps. You can do get the same speed as a Phenom II if your overclock your Athlon x2!

Completely untrue. Upgrading from an athlon X2 brisbane to a phenom II deneb will be a night and day upgrade for him. And cpus with a small cache like an athlon II will perform poorly in certain applications even at much higher clock rates. An athlon X2 will be even worse thanks to the shitty K8 frontend they use. Not to mention Athlon X2s are terrible overclockers.

Quote:So, if I were you I'd save the money and go with Intel and never look back again.

HE DOESN'T HAVE THE MONEY FOR THAT! Read the OP.

(11-30-2011, 12:12 PM)NaturalViolence Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:Upgrading to a Phenom II would not yield much performance or fps. You can do get the same speed as a Phenom II if your overclock your Athlon x2!

Completely untrue. Upgrading from an athlon X2 brisbane to a phenom II deneb will be a night and day upgrade for him. And cpus with a small cache like an athlon II will perform poorly in certain applications even at much higher clock rates. An athlon X2 will be even worse thanks to the shitty K8 frontend they use. Not to mention Athlon X2s are terrible overclockers.

Quote:So, if I were you I'd save the money and go with Intel and never look back again.

HE DOESN'T HAVE THE MONEY FOR THAT! Read the OP.

I checked the gaming performance benchmarks on both AMD CPUs before I made that statement. So, if it doesn't really gain much on the gaming side/aspect, what make you think it would do better on emulation? Also, there are some extra data to look at:

http://forums.pcsx2.net/Thread-CPU-Bench...d-on-FFX-2

57.66 FPS - SLUS 20672 - AMD Phenom II X4 955 - 3.8 GHz OC -Ryner Lute
56.64 FPS - SLUS 20672 - AMD Athlon II X2 250 - 3.8 GHz OC - denimu

54.05 FPS - SLUS 20672 - AMD Phenom II X2 555 Black Edition - 3.6 GHz OC -denimu
53.24 FPS - SLUS 20672 - AMD Athlon II x4 640 - 3.6 GHz OC - Spikexp

40.46 FPS - SLUS 20672 - AMD Athlon II X2 245 - 2.9 GHz Stock - CKL
40.20 FPS - SLUS 20672 - AMD Phenom II X6 1055T - 2.80 GHz Stock (Turbo Core off) - ilovejedd

So, where is this day and night differences that you stated? I stated that he should save up and get something better. I think it's you that have an reading comprehending issue.

Here's my example of day and night differences should look like:

49.08 FPS - SLUS 20672 - Intel Core i7 920 - 2.66 GHz Stock - Master_DX
48.78 FPS - SLUS 20672 - Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 - 2.83 GHz Stock - tuanming
48.41 FPS - SLUS 20672 - Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 - 3.00 GHz Stock - antespo
48.34 FPS - SLUS 20672 - AMD Phenom II X4 945 - 3.3 GHz OC - Abelus
48.05 FPS - SLUS 20672 - AMD Phenom II X6 1055T - 3.33 GHz OC - ilovejedd (Turbo Core off) - CPU-Z
47.69 FPS - SLUS 20672 - AMD Phenom II X4 955 - 3.2 GHz Stock- Ryner Lute

AMD CPUs clocked at over 3GHz still could not manage to beat a lowered clock C2Q. Let play a bit fair and say bump the clock speed of the Q9550 to 3.2GHz and see what would happen, shall we?

56.44 FPS - SLUS 20672 - Intel Core i5 650 - 3.2 GHz Stock (Turbo Boost on) - ilovejedd
55.17 FPS - SLUS 20672 - Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 - 3.2 GHz OC - tuanming

Why post PCSX2 test results here ? PS2 has absolutely different architecture which is pain to emulate and we don't know if it wasn't video card that bottlenecked those systems. Also all AMD CPU there were forced to SSE2 and Phenom II's are capable of SSE4.
And why post old PCSX2 results - i'm getting 120+ fps there with 79 fps being the lowest when a battle scene loads. Of course it was newer build and i used different plugin because i'm on linux but AFAIK ZZ Ogl is slower than GSDX.

Also it's so untrue about getting same fps with OCed Athlon X2, just tested - at max stable overclock it barely reaches 35-45% of stock clocked 955 BE's speed in heavy Wii/GC games.

If you want to bash AMD so badly, you'll better change target to video cards, because it will be true that geforce -> radeons because AMD drivers suck. Old game (Ragnarok Online), GeForce 6600 in linux with wine vs HD5870 native. Full speed on 6600 and less than 10 fps on ATI at same scene. Fail.