What's the best upgrade for me? CPU vs. GPU vs. Monitor

[CmdrKafka]

I've decided I'd like to improve my ED experience by upgrading something on my PC, but I'm not sure what is the best value. I put this PC together in 2015 and it was quite good at the time for the original ED release, but feel it is not keeping up with Odyssey or my evolving playstyle. I was mainly PvE and Exploration until now I am starting to explore more PvP combat. I'd like to upgrade one thing that gives me the best value, maybe around $500 range

Current Hardware: GIGABYTE GA-Z170XP-SLI mainboard, Intel Core i5-6500 (6th gen/Skylake) 16GB DDR4, Asus GTX 1070Ti Rog Strix 8GB, Some model of 75Mhz Asus 23.something" 1080p monitor 1ms response (not an expensive monitor at all). + Saitek X45 HOTAS

I get a decent 75fps in space at high settings unless there are alot of ships and drops down closer to 60fps or even below around a busy station.
Planetside I get 50-60fps just running or driving around, it drops down to 40's if in combat or alot of other players/NPC around me. I think I turned off some terrain related settings and it improved but couldn't just run the default high settings without going below 60fps too often.

I've noticed my CPU usage is fairly close to 100% most of the time, but not pinned, it dips here and there. I'm not sure if the CPU is a limiting factor to my game performance or not. I can upgrade to an i7 in the same generation and it would give me a bit more performance but it seems older i7's in that generation are very expensive for some reason and I'm not sure I want to spend alot on a basically obsolete CPU. On the other hand I don't really want to replace my whole MB/memory,cpu..etc.. that would likely cost alot more than I want to spend.

I've also noticed in combat, that my monitor size and possibly resolution is making it hard to take long sniper shots using rail guns or other long range engineered weapons. It's just too small and hard to line up accurately with HOTAS, ships end up being less an 3km away before can reliably hit them so the my 6km long range engineered weapons aren't really worth it. So I am thinking just a bigger monitor might help? And should it just be a bigger 1080p or go 4k? The problem being with 4k that my FPS may drop even more.

So if you only had around $500 to spend, what would you spend it on to improve FPS for combat? Space combat being the priority, legs second (not really doing the running around thing much yet).

 

[STRONTIUM DOG]

So if you only had around $500 to spend,

lots of multivitamins perhaps
bank it for a better cpu build my advice for odd (lovelace architecture looms fa gpu too)
BUT considering current game softwear optimization the improvements wont be that much diff from what you currently have already imo

 

[GroG79]

New mobo and CPU + ssd storage. Buy second monitor with the rest

Upgrade the GPU next year or so

 

[GJ51]

That's a tough one. Morbad is the one to ask.

My take is that it might give you a bit of a performance boost by upgrading the CPU as that's likely the bottleneck @1080p. The problem is, will the bang for the buck be worth it?

7th gen page on AMZN:

Amazon.com : 7th gen intel processors

Others might have a better take on the problem. You might also need to do a bios update if you go with a 7th gen CPU.

I would not do this for myself as it probably isn't worth it. I'd save the $500 towards a new rig in the future.

HTH

 

[ebbrell]

GPU wise your not getting much for 500 quid, next gen due in sept/october this year.,
so you may get more for money later in year early next.

im seeing 4060 series to be as quick as 3080 is now

how may cores does the CPU have, is it work keeping. is your RAM a decent speed and latency if so, keep it as well.
my CPU when playing elite get hit with about 12%, the GPU is key

 

[GroG79]

Why go 7th gen when 12th gen is out? You need a new mobo to fit all parts that you might want to get in the future; like nvme ssd's, pcie4 etc

 

[Morbad]

Monitor isn't going to change the game's performance. You can already run sub-native resolutions and upscale it to the display's resolution by a variety of in and out of game means, if you need to...but you probably don't with a 1070 Ti.

The 1070 Ti is not particularly fast by Odyssey standards, but it's not slow, has sufficient VRAM, and is almost certainly not the hangup here. The maxed out CPU utilization of your old 4c/4t part is a strong indicator that it's the main issue, and you can confirm this by reducing game resolution and seeing if performance improves. If it doesn't, you aren't GPU limited.

Upgrade paths for your CPU are very limited without a platform swap. A 6700K or 7700K is likely it and even the 7700K is still going to have issues with some settlements in Odyssey.

$500 is a tight budget for an LGA-1700 setup, but is workable if you stick to DDR4. AM4 is soon to be an EOL platform, but may be a bit more affordable. Tentatively, I'd be looking at DDR4 B660 boards plus an i5-12600 (non-K, unless you are using Windows 11 and can swing the K), for Intel. AMD wise, A B550 board plus a Ryzen 5 5600X is roughly equivalent. The Intel setup will be (barely) faster and have more of an upgrade path, but will be a bit more expensive and power hungry.

Edit: You could probably swing a budget 27" 1440p display and a board + CPU upgrade for around $500, if you're frugal. Assuming you mean USD and are in the States that is. If we are talking AUD or CAD, all three parts are asking a bit much for that budget.

 

[CmdrKafka]

New mobo and CPU + ssd storage. Buy second monitor with the rest

Upgrade the GPU next year or so

Sorry forgot to say I am already m.2 SSD on the board so not much gain to be had on the storage side

 

[Para Handy]

New mobo and CPU + ssd storage. Buy second monitor with the rest

Upgrade the GPU next year or so

for under $500 ? - We need the name of your suppliers.

 

[CmdrKafka]

Monitor isn't going to change the game's performance. You can already run sub-native resolutions and upscale it to the display's resolution by a variety of in and out of game means, if you need to...but you probably don't with a 1070 Ti.

The 1070 Ti is not particularly fast by Odyssey standards, but it's not slow, has sufficient VRAM, and is almost certainly not the hangup here. The maxed out CPU utilization of your old 4c/4t part is a strong indicator that it's the main issue, and you can confirm this by reducing game resolution and seeing if performance improves. If it doesn't, you aren't GPU limited.

Upgrade paths for your CPU are very limited without a platform swap. A 6700K or 7700K is likely it and even the 7700K is still going to have issues with some settlements in Odyssey.

$500 is a tight budget for an LGA-1700 setup, but is workable if you stick to DDR4. AM4 is soon to be an EOL platform, but may be a bit more affordable. Tentatively, I'd be looking at DDR4 B660 boards plus an i5-12600 (non-K, unless you are using Windows 11 and can swing the K), for Intel. AMD wise, A B550 board plus a Ryzen 5 5600X is roughly equivalent. The Intel setup will be (barely) faster and have more of an upgrade path, but will be a bit more expensive and power hungry.

Edit: You could probably swing a budget 27" 1440p display and a board + CPU upgrade for around $500, if you're frugal. Assuming you mean USD and are in the States that is. If we are talking AUD or CAD, all three parts are asking a bit much for that budget.

According to what I can find my current mboard will support an i7-7700K at best, this is not a bad improvement, apparently between 55-75% "faster" by some measure: https://hwbench.com/cpus/intel-core...6500?msclkid=57dbb350c0e011eca2862f10e68c6033

However, it's at least $500 for that CPU (new), maybe half that used... seems alot to pay for an old CPU when brand new generation are cheaper. Why are older CPU so expensive?!

 

[GroG79]

for under $500 ? - We need the name of your suppliers.

mobo 80-100
cpu 150-200
ssd 60-80

Profit?

 

[CmdrKafka]

mobo 80-100
cpu 150-200
ssd 60-80

Profit?

Maybe this... (~$500CDN) https://www.amazon.ca/Strix-B550-F-...e57a7d0b4b08adda3dbfd88&qid=1650486880&sr=8-1

I am in Canada, when I said $500 it could be US, it's all about plausible deniability and vagueness when I have to admit what I spent.

 

[GroG79]

You really dont need a 250 mobo unless you like expensive mobo's.. And to be fair.. For that price I'd expect a x570 mobo

The Cpu is a fine choice any day of the week

 

[Morbad]

According to what I can find my current mboard will support an i7-7700K at best, this is not a bad improvement, apparently between 55-75% "faster" by some measure: https://hwbench.com/cpus/intel-core...6500?msclkid=57dbb350c0e011eca2862f10e68c6033

However, it's at least $500 for that CPU (new), maybe half that used... seems alot to pay for an old CPU when brand new generation are cheaper. Why are older CPU so expensive?!

The 7700K will be an upgrade, but no where near enough to justify the cost, IMO.

The reason they are expensive is because the only people buying top-end parts of past generations are those who want or need a drop-in upgrade and cannot or will not migrate to a new platform. Sometimes used parts can be had for cheap, but that's iffy as well. The fastest thing for any given socket is always in some demand.

Maybe this... (~$500CDN) https://www.amazon.ca/Strix-B550-F-Gaming-RyzenTM-Motherboard/dp/B08QYM4ZBZ/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=ASUS+ROG+Strix+X570-E+Gaming+ATX+Motherboard+and+AMD+Ryzen+7+3700X+8-Core,+16-Thread&linkCode=gs3&linkId=c74df147ee57a7d0b4b08adda3dbfd88&qid=1650486880&sr=8-1

I am in Canada, when I said $500 it could be US, it's all about plausible deniability and vagueness when I have to admit what I spent.

Benefits from a high-end motherboard on AM4 are marginal and even most mid-range boards are excessive for most people. None of the chips pull enough current to make a radically overbuilt VRM sensible and the CPUs themselves don't OC enough for the board to matter. Memory overclocking does get better on higher-end boards (better power delivery and more PCB layers for better trace routing/isolation), but this is a modest improvement at the high-end, and almost entirely irrelevant if you are keeping old memory.

If it has the slots and ports you need, it's probably good enough, though at the extreme low-end of price it is wise to be aware of VRM quality, because this is one of the areas where corners will be cut.

Given current prices (AM4 boards have actually been getting more expensive) and CAD, ~250 for the Strix B550-F Gaming isn't bad, but it's definitely possible to spend less without losing much of anything that most users would actually use.

This is the budget option that doesn't lose much: https://www.amazon.ca/MSI-B550M-PRO-VDH-ProSeries-Motherboard/dp/B089D1YG11

I have one of those and it will handle 16-core parts at stock and can easily OC 12-core parts without thermal issues. A six or eight core part is a breeze. Main downsides is the older wifi version (though I had a spare Wifi6 module that I replaced the AC one on mine with) and the mediocre memory overclocking capability compared to my better (and much more expensive) AM4 boards...a few sub-timings have to be looser, all other things being equal. Still, it should handle XMP settings fine.

Again, the Strix is a fine board, but for 100 dollars more it's hard to justify.

 

[CmdrKafka]

Thank you @Morbad @GroG79 @GJ51 @Para Handy @STRONTIUM DOG (and anyone else I missed) for all of your comments. After sleeping on it I've decided I should preserve my budget for now and work towards a completely new Ryzen 5+ build rather than trying to upgrade my old board at all. I did a couple hours playing with settings last night and found my CPU is not really hitting 100% much at all, it average below 80% most of the time except in stations. I am still not really sure why and neither the CPU or GPU maxed out, the FPS just drops.... it must be an odyssey thing. Eitherway, the game is quite playable for me at high settings, I can live with this for now and target a widescreen 1440p or higher with a 144mhz monitor is the eventual new setup. I've always been an intel cpu guy but after delving into the details (thanks to @Morbad 's detailed response ) it seems it is time to give up on that and move to the improved performance of ryzen. Upgrading to the i7 7700 is just not worth it and then i'll have an i5-6500 sitting around that nobody will want either, it's not the most desirable used cpu on ebay to sell. The Gtx1070ti can transfer to the new case initially(if I don't have enough for a new GPU right away) and I can put my old dusty GTX770 in the old case as a secondary seat for my kids to fly with me as multicrew on occasion (my 10 year old daughter loves to tour the Sol system with me).
-Ready, Aye Ready , Cmdr Kafka

 

[Morbad]

I did a couple hours playing with settings last night and found my CPU is not really hitting 100% much at all, it average below 80% most of the time except in stations. I am still not really sure why and neither the CPU or GPU maxed out, the FPS just drops.... it must be an odyssey thing.

Odyssey has very bursty CPU load on a couple of demanding threads so looking at CPU utilization graphs, especially if the polling rate is not very fast, won't paint a clear picture of a CPU limitation.

It's also a fairly memory sensitive game, and poor memory performance may be forcing the CPU to wait on memory accesses, which could explain some of the high frequency/low duration stalls I've seen when looking at 1ms polling rates with GPUView.

Regardless, if the GPU isn't pegged near maximum utilization, it's a sure sign of a CPU and/or memory bottleneck.

I've always been an intel cpu guy but after delving into the details (thanks to @Morbad 's detailed response ) it seems it is time to give up on that and move to the improved performance of ryzen.

Alder Lake (Intel's 12th Gen) is fully competitive with Zen 3 and will actually edge it out at the high-end. It's just that the boards tend to be a little more expensive (they need stronger power delivery because Alder Lake pulls more current), and the memory (DDR5) much more expensive, if you really want Alder Lake to perform best. That said, when comparin the DDR4 setups, the price and performance get pretty close. So, you shouldn't feel you need to go AMD, even though I think it would be slightly more economical to do so.

 

[CmdrKafka]

Alder Lake (Intel's 12th Gen) is fully competitive with Zen 3 and will actually edge it out at the high-end. It's just that the boards tend to be a little more expensive (they need stronger power delivery because Alder Lake pulls more current), and the memory (DDR5) much more expensive, if you really want Alder Lake to perform best. That said, when comparin the DDR4 setups, the price and performance get pretty close. So, you shouldn't feel you need to go AMD, even though I think it would be slightly more economical to do so.

The performance/value looks better to me on AMD... that one board you mentioned I can get it right now for $114 even (open box but new). I also think my next GPU will be AMD as well for the freesync, but my 1070ti has a couple more years for now. I actually had an SLI pair of them originally but sold one back when the demand was so high I made a profit. I had previously been leery of AMD years ago because of the higher power/thermal issues, that seems to be all solved now.

 

[Morbad]

The performance/value looks better to me on AMD... that one board you mentioned I can get it right now for $114 even (open box but new).

I do like that board. It was a good deal on paper, did pretty well in reviews, and I was still pleasantly surprised with mine.

Do be wary of open box items though. They're usually fine, but the return departments of most etailers aren't going to be very thorough with their testing and it's not unheard of for an open box part to be damaged or defective.

I also think my next GPU will be AMD as well for the freesync, but my 1070ti has a couple more years for now.

VESA adaptive sync (which AMD calls FreeSync and NVIDIA calls G-Sync compatible) is available on every remotely recent discrete AMD and NVIDIA GPU, including your 1070 Ti.

I had previously been leery of AMD years ago because of the higher power/thermal issues, that seems to be all solved now.

Current AMD parts are decidedly more power efficient than contemporary Intel ones. However, they aren't really any easier to cool despite this as the thermal density of a Matisse or Vermeer CCD is very high. Total heat output is manageable, but it's crammed into a very small area, so temps aren't generally any better than Intel.

 

[CmdrKafka]

VESA adaptive sync (which AMD calls FreeSync and NVIDIA calls G-Sync compatible) is available on every remotely recent discrete AMD and NVIDIA GPU, including your 1070 Ti.

Freesync monitors are cheaper, and I thought only supported AMD, apparently this is no longer the case, I should really read more. Either way I’ll stick with the 1070ti for at least another year before deciding.

 

[Morbad]

Freesync monitors are cheaper, and I thought only supported AMD, apparently this is no longer the case, I should really read more. Either way I’ll stick with the 1070ti for at least another year before deciding.

There is hardware G-Sync, which NVIDIA now refers to as G-SYNC Ultimate, but aside from that, G-Sync is just an NVIDIA certified VESA Adaptive Synch, which is called FreeSync by AMD. It's like Kleenex vs. tissue or Hyperthreading vs. SMT. VESA Adaptive Sync is the actual underlying standard, FreeSync and most G-Sync implementations are just marketing brands of that standard.

I have a FreeSync monitors that are also automatically G-Sync (non-ultimate) monitors by virtue of supporting FreeSync. One of them isn't even on NVIDIAs compatability lists, but the variable refresh rate works completely fine on my RTX 3080 and GTX 1080 Ti.