How far ahead are you planning for next "dream" build?

[dgsddfgdfhgs]

I am always looking to get most performance / dollar off the parts for max life span/ futureproof as much as possible. (at least I still believe it is) 

 

But after I really built my system ~2yrs ago, and finally got a ssd last yr as final part to complete it. I know I dont have the need to upgrade but I am now getting my self very close to tech news and always got the itch to upgrade...

 

for last build on 1080p, I have planned from 4790k to r7 1700 & 750ti to 970. ...3yrs?

which shall last for another 4 yrs, hopefully

 

it not the issue with the budget that I cant slap in a few 2080ti, but I wouldnt sell or have any plan with the replaced parts.

May be its just me which have nothing to do but doing the planning , at least I am still browsing in this forum.

My next target is solid 1440p/144hz gaming for mid range budge ~~~under USD13/15k

yep so someone please stop me wasting my time, thx....

 

[NineEyeRon]

My current one is going to go 1440p sometime in the next 12 months.

 

The next rig will be my dream build and I give my current one to my son. So about 3-5 years time.

[Stormseeker9]

21 minutes ago, dgsddfgdfhgs said:

I am always looking to get most performance / dollar off the parts for max life span/ futureproof as much as possible. (at least I still believe it is) 

 

But after I really built my system ~2yrs ago, and finally got a ssd last yr as final part to complete it. I know I dont have the need to upgrade but I am now getting my self very close to tech news and always got the itch to upgrade...

 

for last build on 1080p, I have planned from 4790k to r7 1700 & 750ti to 970. ...3yrs?

which shall last for another 4 yrs, hopefully

 

it not the issue with the budget that I cant slap in a few 2080ti, but I wouldnt sell or have any plan with the replaced parts.

May be its just me which have nothing to do but doing the planning , at least I am still browsing in this forum.

My next target is solid 1440p/144hz gaming for mid range budge ~~~under USD13/15k

yep so someone please stop me wasting my time, thx....

 

See my signature for my rig - I play on 1440p but not at 144hz as I care more about quality then max FPS. 

 

If you would Replace the 2070 with 2080, you’d be damn near close those 144fps

[Bananasplit_00]

i dont see myself upgrading for a looooooooooong time, my rig is so incredably overpowered for anything i do. I dont think i am upgrading my LAN PC either as that is about the performance i need on a daily basis, if not actiually also overkill that too and thats just an I5 4690K @ stock and a 1050TI.

[dgsddfgdfhgs]

3 minutes ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

I dont think i am upgrading my LAN PC either as that is about the performance i need on a daily basis, if not actiually also overkill that too and thats just an I5 4690K @ stock and a 1050TI.

Oh no! you are bottlenecking your system  lol

if nothing breaks, it will be a good everlasting system

[jones177]

Right now I need:

 

A more powerful GPU. The RTX 2080 tis needs at least a 35% power boost.

A more powerful CPU. My i7 8700k can't keep up with my 2080 ti. My i7 8086k can barely do it with 5ghz on all cores. I need a CPU that can achieve a Cinebench single core score of 240 but I don't need more than 8 cores.

I need a faster/larger SSD. My SATA SSDs are too slow. Fortunately the 970 EVO exists but I need 2tbs. 

 

I need all his to run large high refresh rate monitors.

Even though I bought a 38" 3840 X 1600 75hz monitor a few weeks ago, I want to get the 144hz version when it comes out. This is the only size that looks good beside a 4k monitor at over 27"  

I plan to abandon 4k for the time being since it is so hard to run at high refresh rates and wait until 4k 21:9 144hz comes out to go back. That may change if a cheap 100hz 32" 4k monitor comes out.  

[RasmusDC]

running a 1080TI and a 8700k, i am waiting for the next generation. the 2080ti is just not enough.. went from 2x970 to the 1080ti.

 

i would really like to upgrade, i run racing sims, currently on one 4k screen, but i would either like 3x4K or a HIGH resolution VR solution, the VR solution is not created yet, Pimax 5k+ (8k is rubbish) and the HTC VIVE Pro are still not good enough..

 

but to drive 3x4k or a VR solution, will demand a lot... so i guess that is when i will be upgrading next time.

 

actually looking into downgrading my 4K 60hz IPS desktop monitor to a 2560x1440p 165hz, just for the gaming. 

 

But i really like having the same resolution at my gaming rig vs my simulator.

[dgsddfgdfhgs]

3 minutes ago, RasmusDC said:

running a 1080TI and a 8700k, i am waiting for the next generation. the 2080ti is just not enough.. went from 2x970 to the 1080ti.

I agree, gpus are just not ready for 4k, and imo not ready for 1440p/144hz

in some situation they can only barely run 1440p/144hz, but like same situation as maxwell ready for VR...

no headrooms = not ready

[Gareque]

Hell, I just get happy when I get to do 'a' build, let alone dream build.

 

I'll probably have to wait around 5-10 years, either for myself, my wife or perhaps my son when he's old enough.

[mach]

3 hours ago, jones177 said:

My i7 8700k can't keep up with my 2080 ti

In what kind of workload/games would the 8700k be bottlenecking a 2080 ti?

I have the impression that if I choose reasonable graphic settings in modern games the gpu would always be the limiting factor. Even with high refresh rate monitors.

I am rocking a 6700 with my 2080 but I'm not seeing any bottleneck. I really want to dump intel and go ryzen but can't justify buying new CPU+ motherboard when the current ones are working fine.

[Princess Luna]

For personal use and gaming my locked i7 8700 at 4.45ghz all cores with a GTX 1080 Ti is sufficient still, with a few adjust on graphical settings I can play on 3440x1440p100fps perfectly fine.

 

I may build something new when we're on something like 10nm++ for Intel and nVidia is at 7nm... but I don't think I'll leave the 3440x1440p resolution as it makes me more than satisfied enough.

[PlayStation 2]

Meh. I've been more iterative with my rig rather than going all-in and building something new every now and then. My current setup started with an Athlon X4 950 and an HD 7850.

I upgraded the 950 to a Ryzen 7 1700X because I desired more CPU power, specifically for recording and games. I upgraded the 7850 to a 580 because I desired... Team Fortress 2 at 3840x2160 and a little less artifacting. I upgraded the 580 to a Fury X because I desired better performance from Forza Horizon 4 at attractive settings at 3840x2160 and because it's always intrigued me.

 

Honestly, my next path'll probably be me doing a Micro-ATX Threadripper rig just so I can start recording external shit at 2160p60. That'll likely be the build I spoil myself in, throwing 32GB of RAM in that rig just so I can fuck around with high resolution scans of whatever without having to close whatever game I'm playing. It'll probably be the rig I get a 2160p monitor, too... or a 2560x1600 monitor.

[jones177]

1 hour ago, mach said:

In what kind of workload/games would the 8700k be bottlenecking a 2080 ti?

I have the impression that if I choose reasonable graphic settings in modern games the gpu would always be the limiting factor. Even with high refresh rate monitors.

I am rocking a 6700 with my 2080 but I'm not seeing any bottleneck. I really want to dump intel and go ryzen but can't justify buying new CPU+ motherboard when the current ones are working fine.

I was using the Heaven benchmark to compare my EVGA RTX 2080 ti XC/i7 8086k setup with my EVGA RTX 2080 ti FTW3/i7 8700k. The i7 8700k is stock and the i7 8086k has 5ghz on all cores. 

 

Running the bench at 1080p the XC/i7 8086k setup had the 2080 ti running at the 130% power target. The FTW3 Ultra with the i7 8700k could only get up to 70% of the power target and lost.

I then ran the bench at 1440p and the FTW3/i7 8700k started to catch up. At 1600p the FTW3/i7 8700k won with 115% power usage. 

 

Both of my GPUs are overclocked with the same settings so the FTW3 should have had a slight win in all tests if the CPUs were equal since it can use more power.  

 

To see if you are bottlenecking get Precision X1. If your power target only goes up to 100% do a bios update. Turn the power target all the way up and run your favorite GPU/CPU bench. If you can't run full out at the power target set by Precision X1 you are bottlenecking.

 

A Ryren 7 2700x has the same IPC as your i7 6700. There is no current Ryzen upgrade for gaming, for you.    

[DesolationGod]

well my next upgrade will be after the new ryzen launches soooo a few months?

[Automobili3XF]

I'm in the process looking for new motherboards and CPUs for my current system, while it is fine and attends me really well i already commited to selling it for a friend, so its gonna go.

i really wanted to base it out of an X299 motherboard because i have a Buffallo BD player that supports UHD playback and a modern Intel chipset is needed for that. I could also base it out of a Z390 motheboard buuuut i don't like Intel's consumer line.

[mach]

36 minutes ago, jones177 said:

I was using the Heaven benchmark to compare my EVGA RTX 2080 ti XC/i7 8086k setup with my EVGA RTX 2080 ti FTW3/i7 8700k. The i7 8700k is stock and the i7 8086k has 5ghz on all cores. 

 

Running the bench at 1080p the XC/i7 8086k setup had the 2080 ti running at the 130% power target. The FTW3 Ultra with the i7 8700k could only get up to 70% of the power target and lost.

I then ran the bench at 1440p and the FTW3/i7 8700k started to catch up. At 1600p the FTW3/i7 8700k won with 115% power usage. 

 

Both of my GPUs are overclocked with the same settings so the FTW3 should have had a slight win in all tests if the CPUs were equal.  

 

To see if you are bottlenecking get Precision X1. If your power target only goes up to 100% do a bios update. Turn the power target all the way up and run your favorite GPU/CPU bench. If you can't run full out at the power target set by Precision X1 you are bottlenecking.

 

A Ryren 7 2700x has the same IPC as your i7 6700. There is no current Ryzen upgrade for gaming, for you.    

Perhaps that would be the case in benchmarks. But I don't do benchmarks I only observe in games.

I won't pursue 100%/100% perfect match but if that's your passion then good for you!

 

For AAA games my gpu would have 95%+ usage but cpu only floating around 60% utilization. (in afterburner)

In single thread intensive game like csgo I do see core #0 having very high usage while gpu sitting at ~40%. I believe it's a bottleneck but I'm getting 120-200 fps consistently (with maxed details) so it's fine to me. I see it as "hardware limit" without the negative impression of "bottleneck" because it's still a good framerate. 

I want to "upgrade" to ryzen because I think doubling the cores would bring benefit to all daily multitasking i.e. smoother PC experience.

Gaming performance would not be the justification as the 6700 is quite sufficient at the moment!

[flibberdipper]

I've had a good idea of what I want since the Node 202 came out. And every time I look at the price tag in PCPP it kills me knowing that I'll somehow have to save up just shy of $2,500 on (probably) almost minimum wage.

[mach]

10 minutes ago, flibberdipper said:

I've had a good idea of what I want since the Node 202 came out. And every time I look at the price tag in PCPP it kills me knowing that I'll somehow have to save up just shy of $2,500 on (probably) almost minimum wage.

How about the Dr.Saber Sentry Linus just did a build in?

It fits the same hardware the node can but even smaller. 7L vs 10.2L. 

I think it's the best SFF slim case around. 

1 April should be the day when purchase campaign starts?

 

[flibberdipper]

35 minutes ago, mach said:

How about the Dr.Saber Sentry Linus just did a build in?

It fits the same hardware the node can but even smaller. 7L vs 10.2L. 

I think it's the best SFF slim case around. 

1 April should be the day when purchase campaign starts?

 

I would like to, don't get me wrong, but if I'm not mistaken the first gen of them were some obscene price and ya boi ain't aboutta spend fat stacks just on a case.

[mach]

25 minutes ago, flibberdipper said:

I would like to, don't get me wrong, but if I'm not mistaken the first gen of them were some obscene price and ya boi ain't aboutta spend fat stacks just on a case.

Yeah they were on the expensive side but to me the case would last multiple generations of hardwares so I don't mind spending too much on it.

They weren't mass produced by an established manufacturer so I think the price is somewhat reasonable. (other niche projects have similar price tags)

I understand everyone has their priorities.

[RejZoR]

I don't. I'm following the industry and I upgrade it either "just because" or with a reason. Last reasons were problems I couldn't debug and fixed it by changing the platform entirely. Besides, that X58 build was getting a bit old anyway.

 

Currently, only thing I'm sort of planning is if new Ryzens will really be hitting 5GHz out of the box. We've come so far most things already run at max speed out of the box. For example my GTX 1080Ti runs so fast out of the box (1950MHz core) I just can't be bothered installing and fiddling with OC for those extra 50MHz to hit magical 2GHz level). Same with CPU. I really want to own AMD again, although 5820K at 4.5GHz is serving me perfectly fine. 5GHz out of the box would be sweet. But it's likely I won't upgrade for a while. CPU does the job great, graphic card is still nearly as fast as new gen flagships and I already have 32GB RAM so no need to upgrade that ever lol. It's just curiosity really.

 

I usually make up my mind in few days and just pull a trigger on something. Because why the hell not

[cluelessgenius]

planning/building my dream for a couple of years now. by the time im "done" its gonna be 7 years outdated or so :D. plan way to long and way to complex

[Giganthrax]

Finished my current dream build in September, so not really planning any upgrades soon.

 

If needed, I may update my CPU and GPU in the next 2 years or so once Ryzen 4000 is a thing, though. 

[jones177]

1 hour ago, mach said:

Perhaps that would be the case in benchmarks. But I don't do benchmarks I only observe in games.

I won't pursue 100%/100% perfect match but if that's your passion then good for you!

 

For AAA games my gpu would have 95%+ usage but cpu only floating around 60% utilization. (in afterburner)

In single thread intensive game like csgo I do see core #0 having very high usage while gpu sitting at ~40%. I believe it's a bottleneck but I'm getting 120-200 fps consistently (with maxed details) so it's fine to me. I see it as "hardware limit" without the negative impression of "bottleneck" because it's still a good framerate. 

I want to "upgrade" to ryzen because I think doubling the cores would bring benefit to all daily multitasking i.e. smoother PC experience.

Gaming performance would not be the justification as the 6700 is quite sufficient at the moment!

With the RTX 2080 ti you need a 5ghz chip to take full advantage of it in games.

Tech Deals found that out and stated it at 10:12 of this video.

 

 

I play games at 4k and 3840 X 1600. My 2080 ti is running full out at 4k on games like Assassin's Creed Odyssey and that is to maintain 60fps. 

My 2080 ti at 3840 X 1600 is cruising along with no stress at all but I want to upgrade to a 144hz version of the monitor and to run that my i7 8700k has to go.

 

CPU usage is a bit different than GPU usage. If a 3D game is using 1 core to render on a 4 core CPU then 25% usage is 100% usage on that 1 core and you will lose frames going over 25% if the game needs more. If the game is using 2 or 3 cores the same math applies.

GPUs have one job so you only lose frames if you are running at 100% and the game need more.

 

I upgraded from a i7 6700k to a i7 8086k and 6 cores is smoother than 4 cores but I only felt it in games.