Jump to content

Read This Before Upgrading Your Old Computer!!!!!!!!


92 replies to this topic

#81 JackDeth

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 32 posts

Posted 19 June 2012 - 08:57 AM

Oh god....what a mess!
OK...after 30 or more years in the computer industry designing, building, and testing...I will try to enlighten the group.
First...a power supply (of whatever wattage) supplies the rail with the voltage set by the regulators inside the PSU.
Next...the sensor line (attached to the rail) determines the feedback to the regulators the keep the rail at the correct voltage.
Now...the sensor line (in a top of the line PSU ) is attached at the FAR end of the rail.
In other words...look at the rail as being a water hose...perhaps 100 feet long...if you sense the pressure (voltage) at the tap it will say one thing....but if you check the pressure (voltage) at the far end of the hose (rail) it might say something lower.
This is one difference in PSU's....good ones allow for voltage drop throughout the rail....and perhaps if the motherboard is not correctly designed (thin traces or bad layouts) then yes...a powerful PSU with end of rail sensing can overpower the motherboard and maybe cause a failure.
BUT....boards such as these have not been around since the days of 8088's.
Even the cheap Tiawanese boards using 80286's were good.
Hope this clears things up....probably not unfortunately....but I have done my best.
Jack

Edited by JackDeth, 19 June 2012 - 09:01 AM.


#82 Kelthar

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 75 posts
  • LocationCA

Posted 19 June 2012 - 08:58 AM

View PostAmro One, on 18 June 2012 - 09:00 PM, said:

Make sure its actually physical duel core/quad core and Virtual cores also.


Never, ever, buy a duel core processor, all that fighting in the core generates extra heat which limits processor life. Stick with the Dual or Quad or more core processors.
:lol:

#83 MagnusEffect

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 404 posts

Posted 19 June 2012 - 09:08 AM

View PostKelthar, on 19 June 2012 - 08:58 AM, said:


Never, ever, buy a duel core processor, all that fighting in the core generates extra heat which limits processor life. Stick with the Dual or Quad or more core processors.
:)


wait... what? that's a thing? i always assumed "Duel" and "Dual" were the same thing, but people just don't know how to spell. I've been using a core 2 duo for so long i haven't been paying attention to it.

#84 Fynn

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 111 posts
  • LocationUnited KIngdom

Posted 19 June 2012 - 09:08 AM

@OP, if your getting heat build up, it not due to the PSU, its down to bad airflow, sub-par cooling in the case, or even cables blocking airflow can cause heat build up. An ideal set up for a mid range pc is a 80-120mm fan at front of case to draw air in, and large 120mm exhaust fan at the back of the case, with all cables being tied back out of the way of the airflow, with maybe a 80mm fan mounted on the side panel. Now thats justa simple set up.
If you look at some of the gameing case's made by corsair and coolermaster, you can see there designed for max cooling and airflow, and the bigger the case the better the fans and cooling will be.
Oh and if the cpu is getting too hot, you have either a bad seal on the heat sink (not fitted properly, or too little thermal paste used) or its a cheap and ineffective heatsink and fan that should be replaced by a good after market cooler.

#85 Phelan Ward-Kell

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 224 posts
  • LocationSouthern Ontario, Canada

Posted 19 June 2012 - 09:21 AM

Ok, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Your intentions are well meaning, but even trying to dumb this down to the laman level, you're providing them with info that will have them spending way more than needed, and definitely providing them with some info that is not entirely correct.

Here is two-decades worth of accumulated computer knowledge to address my concerns in your post.
Please understand that I'm doing this with the utmost respect towards what your intent is.


View PostTeralitha, on 18 June 2012 - 08:17 PM, said:

First rule, If you dont know what GHz means, dont buy until you do. This is the speed at which your computer processes information. The faster the better. So your computer has 2 processor... or even 4 processors, but if your GHz is low, your game will be slow. I suggest anything that is in the 3GHz range for games. Much more than that and you get into overclocking and you run the risk of your motherboard being too hot, without having some added cooling devices. And if your internals run super hot, the life of your puter will be lessened.

Duo Core... Quad core, I5, I7, AMD phenom II, Pentium ***, what do these all mean? best thing to do is check manufacturer descriptions. Make sure to find out exactly just how many processors it really has, and what the GHz is. You want at least 4 processor(Quad Core), and a proccessor speed in the higher ranges. Like 2.8GHz or more. This is for games.


Firstly, Ghz does reference how quickly the signal is moving, but the overall speed at which a CPU processes information is the sum of its parts. Things like the CPU's internal cache effect this, therefore going for "more Ghz" is not the answer.
multi-cores, hyperthreading and larger L2 and L3 caches garner larger performance gains than the clock speed of the CPU, therefore advising someone instead on specific models of a CPU would benefit them even greater.

I am biased towards Intel, so I would suggest something (anything, really) in the Core i5 line-up, which offers a selection of dual and quad core models.


View PostTeralitha, on 18 June 2012 - 08:17 PM, said:

Ram... what is it? what does it do? For playing games, the more the better. If you can afford to max it out, do it. But, note that the amount of ram that is actually used by your system depends on your operating system. For example, if your using windows XP, believe the most RAM it supports is 2GB, and If I remember correctly, Windows Vista only supports up to 4GB of RAM. So if your computer has more ram, your older windows version may not be able to use more than 4GB. I have windows 7, and I use 16GB of RAM to run my games, I think that even 8 GB is not enough for todays Gaming.(Windows XP 32-bit SP3 I think runs up to 4GB also)


RAM isn't just for playing games. RAM is the equivalent to our temporary (or short-term) memory. XP, Vista and Windows 7 all have 64-bit versions that can use more than 4GB of RAM. If someone needs to know if their OS is 32-bit or 64-bit, tell them to right-click the "My Computer" (or just "Computer" in Vista and 7) icon on their desktop and select "Properties." Near the bottom of the window that opens is their info.
As far as the "more is better" train of thought, this is going to have people falling into what is effectively the biggest tech support sink hole in existance. "Oh, your computer is slow, just add more memory."
I have been running 12GB's of RAM for almost 3 years now, and I have yet to run into a situation that 99% of computer users are likely to be in. I am, at this very moment, running 3 instances of Eve Online, 2 Chrome windows with multiple tabs open on each, an excel sheet, Skype and a variety of smaller programs, plus I have 2 1/2 dozen programs in my taskbar, and yet I'm using 6.24GB of RAM.
You can more than get away with 6-8GB of RAM with PLENTY of room to spare for future games.



View PostTeralitha, on 18 June 2012 - 08:17 PM, said:

Hard Drive (HD) memory. Most computers have tons of it nowadays. Shouldnt be an issue. But if your computer is very old... well... get a new one, upgrading HD is not expensive. Old Hard Drives can have a heart attack and die at any time.


My only qualm with this is using the term "Hard Drive Memory." Every tech support out there refers to RAM as memory, and Hard Drives as storage. If you start trying to mix and match the terms, you'll defeat your own argument of simplifying this for everyone.
RAM = Memory
Hard Drive = Storage


View PostTeralitha, on 18 June 2012 - 08:17 PM, said:

Graphix, the big one...
First.. if you have integrated graphics? Hell FKN NO. Never ever ever ever never ever never ever buy a computer with integrated graphics for GAMING no matter how much a saleman might shmooze you. Just refuse.
Alaways go straight to teh source when researching a video card, that means, look at the manufacturers website, and read the full descriptions of any given card your looking to buy for the specs. Does it have its own on board memory?(GB) Does it have its own processor? How fast is it? Does it have adequate cooling? Its own cooling fan? Does it support 4.0 shaders? For gaming, you want to get the best of the best. Or the best you can afford. Look at all the newest models, and read about what they are able to do, or what they are designed to do. Alot of online stores will sell a variant of the original designs, make sure to read those specs too before buying, they might be stripped of some of the capabilities that are listed by the manufacturer.


Ok, this advice is all over the place. Cooling fans, memory and shaders? No. Manufacturers website? No. Look up computer hardware review sites, such as Guru3D, Tom's Hardware, Hardware Canucks or any number of other sites available and read their reviews, with REAL WORLD tests. AMD(ATi) and nVidia have been back and forth for years, showing that the amount of memory, or the clock speeds of video cards mean crap all. Hell, the amount of memory most cards have won't even see use until you hit resolutions in the 2000+, or you're spanning a game across multiple monitors.
Again, running 3 instances of Eve Online at this very moment, and I'm using 817MB of my 2048.


View PostTeralitha, on 18 June 2012 - 08:17 PM, said:

Another important piece of the puzzle.. Power supply unit (PSU) Now suppose you went to an online store, customized everything to get the best of the best, or the best you can afford, and you get it home, only to discover that it isnt running games as well as you thought it would. Well this may be the result of the PSU, being substandard. PSU are not often mentioned in a computers specs because for general purposes, it isnt important. If you cant find the info anywere else, youll have to open your PC and look at the powersupply for the specs. Alot of PC companies use the cheapeast, bare minimum that they can get in mass quantity. Many will be 300 WATTs. For a gaming rig, this is not enough.

But be cautious, because if you get a powersupply that is too much, it can fry your computer. I recommend only a minor upgrade to the PSU, if your stuck with a 300watt. There are several poor quality PSU's out there that have good specs, but have little or no heat reduction capacity, and require you to buy another cooling fan or several. I suggest not going more than anything in the 400-500watt range unless you really know what your doing. You can also, before buying the PC< ask the builder about the PSU, and try to get them to put on an adequate PSU.


So, I read through all the posts before coming back to reply, and I definitely saw in your replies that you were addressing a heat concern, but you did not say that was the cause of a PSU frying a computer in this post. Also, quite frankly, PSU's are not the only source of heat in a computer. If the PSU is dishing out heat, but the other parts are well cooled, then you have nothing to worry about.
Here's the skinny: Larger PSU's are perfectly fine. If you upgrade your computer to start pulling on more power, then heat will be an issue, but with what you're advising people of here, they'll not require much power at all. The benefit of something larger than they need? Upgrade freedom, and less strain on their PSU. That means that it will be less likely to die and fry some of their parts.
The advice you need to be providing? Get something in the 750w or larger range, with a PSU labeled as 80+ or 90+. These are ratings that mean that PSU is certified to be 80 or 90% efficient.
An example would be this: If your computer needs 100w to power all of the hardware inside it, an 80+ power supply would have to draw approximately 125w from the wall outlet (100 / 125 = 80).
This is also why the PSU must be more powerful than you require. If your computer parts need 600w of power, and you get a 600w PSU, you're asking for trouble and heartache.




There is something else of importance: Motherboard. For what would a computer be without a quality motherboard. It's the roads that all of the other parts drive along to meet up and have those killer raves.
Reading up on some reviews using the same sites I mentioned previously is a safe bet.
Personally, I trust ASUS with my life. You can look at other options though, such as Gigabyte, eVGA or MSI. Personally, I avoid ASRock and Biostar like the zombie plague.



There ya go Teralitha. As if your post couldn't be any longer, I've added to it. :):rolleyes:

#86 MagnusEffect

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 404 posts

Posted 19 June 2012 - 10:53 AM

Epic doublepost Phelan :angry:

#87 Phelan Ward-Kell

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 224 posts
  • LocationSouthern Ontario, Canada

Posted 19 June 2012 - 11:10 AM

View PostMagnusEffect, on 19 June 2012 - 10:53 AM, said:

Epic doublepost Phelan :angry:

Whoops. :P

#88 CW Grayson

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 166 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 20 June 2012 - 05:48 AM

View PostBFalcon, on 19 June 2012 - 05:59 AM, said:

I'm a great believer in SSDs, having used a pair of 60Gb for 2 years now with a 1Tb drive backing them up - one is for system (windows 7, x64) and the second is for priority games (I used to play Arma 2 which is pretty disc-intensive). As a result, I'd strongly recommend £75 be spent on a 120Gb SSD for your system and key games. Someone else might tell you to forget it and go for a gaming HDD instead...

Actually your "old" way with 2 SSDs is better. One for OS only and one for games give more performance than only 1 SSD with bot OS and games. Of course with a HDD for backup and store.

Edited by CW Grayson, 20 June 2012 - 05:49 AM.


#89 BFalcon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,120 posts
  • LocationEgremont, Cumbria, UK

Posted 20 June 2012 - 06:30 AM

View PostCW Grayson, on 20 June 2012 - 05:48 AM, said:

Actually your "old" way with 2 SSDs is better. One for OS only and one for games give more performance than only 1 SSD with bot OS and games. Of course with a HDD for backup and store.


Yeah, but you can end up with wasted space on one and running out of room on the system drive like I'm starting to (thank you MS and constant updates!!), which is why I suggested combining them. I mean, heck - my system (Quad core Q6600 2.4 GHz) maxes out on the SATA II SSD when loading Windows now, so I think it's fast enough to have just one. Heck, it's not like you need to worry about seek times with them.. :D

I do dream of striped SATA III SSDs though... and with prices finally dropping, we can see it becoming feasable to even look at a RAID 5 array with 3 or more drives - data security, speed AND capacity in the one array.

#90 Tsen Shang

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 299 posts
  • LocationBrentwood, Tennessee

Posted 20 June 2012 - 06:38 AM

I bought an iMac for this game, is that bad?

#91 CW Grayson

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 166 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 20 June 2012 - 11:11 PM

View PostBFalcon, on 20 June 2012 - 06:30 AM, said:


Yeah, but you can end up with wasted space on one and running out of room on the system drive like I'm starting to (thank you MS and constant updates!!), which is why I suggested combining them. I mean, heck - my system (Quad core Q6600 2.4 GHz) maxes out on the SATA II SSD when loading Windows now, so I think it's fast enough to have just one. Heck, it's not like you need to worry about seek times with them.. <_<

I do dream of striped SATA III SSDs though... and with prices finally dropping, we can see it becoming feasable to even look at a RAID 5 array with 3 or more drives - data security, speed AND capacity in the one array.

Well, the performance is much better if you use a SSD just for the OS.
You have a 60GB SSD just for the OS and it's running out of space? There is something wrong for sure. I gave my win7 partition 40GB and that's more than it ever needs. Currently it's at ~24GB and running over a year.
Reason i suggested a seperate SSD for System OS is you have different controllers for the HDD/SSD's. That'll make a huge difference, but i'm sure you know this reading your post.

#92 NinjaCool

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 241 posts
  • LocationDenmark (happiest people on earth!)

Posted 20 June 2012 - 11:38 PM

View PostTsen Shang, on 20 June 2012 - 06:38 AM, said:

I bought an iMac for this game, is that bad?
Im sure its fine I just hope my Amiga 500 will tun it <_<

#93 Jenkss

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 175 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 20 June 2012 - 11:42 PM

Won't need to upgrade. Only built a new gaming machine right at the end of last year. I think mine'll do JUUUUUUUST fine.

60FPS in everything I've thrown at it so far on max.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users