Upgrading key components for 5-boxing

[Stompp]

Considering upgrading some components to go from 3 to 5 boxing, a little advice would be appreciated.

Current Setup:

• ASUS P5E LGA 775 Intel X38 ATX Intel Motherboard
• Patriot Extreme Performance 4GB (4 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 1200 (PC2 9600)
• Intel Xeon E3110 Wolfdale 3.0GHz 6MB L2 Cache LGA 775 65W Dual-Core Processor (Relabeled e8400 desktop proc, don't ask)
• BFG Tech BFGE88512GTSE GeForce 8800GTS (G92) 512MB 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Supported Video Card
• Windows XP Media Center Edition

Considering:

• Upgrading to 8GB
• running 64 bit vista and possibly upgrading the processor to:
• Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 Yorkfield 2.66GHz LGA 775 95W Quad-Core Processor Model BX80569Q9450

I'm wondering if this would be sufficient to run 4x 800x600 and 1x 1920x1200 pretty smoothly (off just the one video card, two monitors)
First monitor = 1280x1024 so each instance would be scaled to 640x480, second monitor = 1920x1200

[Esquilo]

Your current box would probably do it under a 64bit os, processor usage would be close to 98% all the time though. I ran 3 with an e8400, 4gb ram and an 8800gt with no problem. The quad will handle 5 though

[kadaan]

I'd say the quad is your main upgrade. I'm running 4 instances with a C2Quad and only 2g of ram just fine. 40+ fps on all four, the only time I lag is in Shattrath.

[Stompp]

So the quad will probably be the next upgrade... think vista 64 would be worth upgrading to? that's damn near $500 for the lot

[wowphreak]

getting a quad is overkill yer current box should handle 5 with ease.

[kadaan]

getting a quad is overkill yer current box should handle 5 with ease.

My second computer is slightly better than his (8800GT 512, the rest is the same) and I start to crap out with 4 instances running. 5 isn't playable even at 640x480 and all settings on minimum.

[heyaz]

getting a quad is overkill yer current box should handle 5 with ease.

My second computer is slightly better than his (8800GT 512, the rest is the same) and I start to crap out with 4 instances running. 5 isn't playable even at 640x480 and all settings on minimum.

Really? Are you running Vista or XP? I'm running 4 instances on a 2 year old laptop - dual core, 7900 GS, 2GB RAM, 800x600 minimum settings. It's not amazing but it's playable, main window its like 20-50fps depending on where I am. This is XP though. I have another laptop with Vista, 2GB ram but a integrated video card, and it can't even run One client better than about 10 fps... I wasn't expecting much from the little video card, but seriously, 10fps? Perhaps it's vista

[d0z3rr]

Not sure why people go on processor usage. If your computer is crunching anything, it wil always be 100%. Doesn't matter if you're using Word, Calculator, or Folding@Home. If it's crunching, it's at 100% usage. The point is how long it's at 100%, a slower processor will be at 100% for a longer time.

[wowphreak]

Bet he's running vista with 2-3 gigs of ram?

[Bovidae]

Your current processor is definitely your bottleneck. The Q9450 is the hot processor right now. The 4 core architecture is great for boxing, you will not be disappointed. Your mobo should be good to go.


64bit, Vista, 8gb ram and WoW: Don't bother, World of Warcraft is a 32 bit application and runs on a 32 bit emulator in Vist64 called Windows on Windows (Yes WoW-on-WoW) and is still limited to the same restrictions you are accustomed to. That said, ram is cheap, other games are 64bit compatible, hopefully Warcraft will be one day, but don't expect ANY performance increases due to using more than 4gb ram.