This is another age old argument.
One thing you should know is that your video card is SERIOUSLY lagging you, but I'm sure you are aware of that. The answer to "what graphics card" Depends on how much you are willing to spend. "tomshardwareguide" and "hardocp" have some pretty good guides for picking the right card for you rbudget.
Depending on what the underlying architecture of the software you are viewing these maps in is, upgrading the cpu may or may not make ANY difference. Some programs are "CPU" dependant, where athlon, opteron, pentium4 does "all the work" whereas other applications [usually more common in games] are very much graphics limited.
I have a client who has a 1 Ghz athlon computer system with 768mb of ram who plays world of warcraft. We recently upgraded her computer by going from an nvidia geforce4 mx-200 video card to a radeon 9600Pro = Her 3d benchmarks in Aquamark went up over 500%, yet.. ALL I did was change video card.
Without knowing what program you are using, I can't tell you if it's graphics card intensive, or cpu intensive. Heck, it could be DISK limited if its, say.. Microsoft Streets & Trips, for example.
On another note, the argument that amd is cheaper & faster is NOT valid anymore.
I'll do a quick comparison, right now (07/02/2006)
an "Intel Pentium D 930" processor can be purchased for ~$175 us dollars
That cpu is 64 bit, 3.0 Ghz, dual core (two 3.0 ghz cores) with 2 megabytes of cache memory on each core.
Whereas, RIGHT NOW, the cheapest dual core "Athlon X2" cpu you can buy from amd is :
Athlon 64 X2 3800+ = $300
This cpu is 64 bit, 2.0 Ghz, dual core (two 2.0 Ghz cores) with 512K (1/2 a megabyte) cache memory on each core.
So. compare
................Intel vs Amd
Price : $175 vs $300
64 bit? Yes vs Yes
Core Speed : 3,000 Mhz vs 2,000 Mhz (intel is 50% more in frequency)
Cache : 4mb total vs 1 mb total.
I know, and agree, that amd processors do more per clock cycle, but they do NOT perform 50% faster, clock for clock, nor do they perform 71% faster to justify the price difference that AMD CHARGES over intel.
Which sounds faster? "6 ghz total power with 4mb cache" or "4 ghz total power with 1mb cache"
Shouldn't the 4 ghz option with 25% of the cache cost, at the very least, around the same amount? not "almost double"?