PC for the future

[Reddice]

Hey there guy's and gal's.

 

I just placed an order for a phantom 820 and a Maximus 6 formula to go with it and i am wondering about the furture of the rest of my build, and i know what is enough for what is available atm in terms of game's and applications but what i want to do is to have it be able to handle everything i throw at it for the next 5 year's or so(hard to predict i know), for example i have heard that higer memory frequency is starting to effect game's, also that the CPU will have better relationship with the GPU.

 

The build i was originally thinking about was:

NZXT Phantom 820 (not changing this)
ROG 6 Formula (not changing this)
Gskil 16gb 2400MHz
i5 4670k
Samsung EVO 250Gb
Asus GTX 770 OC 4Gb.(might go for the 780 OC)

 

So in that perspective would it be better to invest in a 4770k instead of a 4670k and 2400MHz mem. instead of 1600MHz mem.(price's between the mem is marginal). or is this build decent enough for that purpose.

[SAV1OUR]

just go 8gb ram and save your money 

[Reddice]

just go 8gb ram and save your money 

No i am sticking to 16 Gb's since the cost isn't that much difference but thanks anyway.

[SAV1OUR]

No i am sticking to 16 Gb's since the cost isn't that much difference but thanks anyway.

well if your going to get 16gb you may as well get 4770k because 16gb will only ever benefit you if your editing  

[Reddice]

i should have mentioned this in the first post and that is that i am not that affraid of the cost i have set myslef budget of 2.5k

[GuideMe002]

go for a 780

[BrightCandle]

I don't think you will regret saving some money on a 4670k nor on slower RAM and pumping that into the GPU or SSD. The gains on the CPU and RAM for the cost is really minimal whereas elsewhere that money can really make a difference in capacity or performance.

[Reddice]

Thanks to all that are giving me savings advise they are appreciated, but that isn't what i am originally asking about.

What i would like to know is that with how things are advancing would this setup suffice for the upcoming years and would it be considered a good comp in let's say four year's time

 

That is would I5 be good enough for that period or should i get a I7, and with DDR4(or GDDR5 whitchever they go with) launching in the near future then would a 2.4MHz be good enough.

[FellTheSky]

its better to get cheap ram and ocing it, than buy expensive high speed ram IMO.

 

I bought 4x2 value kingston cheap ram, and its running at 1866 9/10/10/27 for 3 years now, from the timmings ive saw in expensive kits, the performance lost is minimal

[BrightCandle]

The best strategy for good performance over the long term with computers is to buy at economically preferable points fairly regularly as the parts progress.  Different parts gain performance at different rates so the ideal price point and upgrade time period differs with each. GPUs are one of the faster growing areas and CPUs are now quite slow comparably.

 

Look at it this way - a hyperthreaded CPU like the 4770 verses the 4670 is at most 20% faster. Its only 20% faster in the really quite rare circumstances where a program uses 8 cores and does so using a widely mixed range of instructions across floating point and integer calculations. This isn't something you find in Movie encoding, in games or really general desktop use. It can describe compression but most of the benefit is in enterprise like applications and databases. That feature on its own is charged at $100. We have had it since the original i7 920 series some 5 years ago and to this day barely any desktop software has managed to use it. Is it likely thus to deliver benefit in the future? Maybe, but its far from certain that it will. The current evidence suggests its probably not going to be critical.

 

My main advice is don't try and buy a machine that will last 5 years, instead buy reasonably priced performance machines today and save that money and buy upgrades an replacements in a year or two's time. You'll maintain better performance over the life of the PC and it will cost you less. Unlike the laptop and tablet users you wont be required to upgrade everything, so the HDD can stay as is and most likely you'll only be compelled to replace the CPU in 5 years or whereas the GPU will probably want 2 yearly upgrades.

[harrynowl]

Thanks to all that are giving me savings advise they are appreciated, but that isn't what i am originally asking about.

What i would like to know is that with how things are advancing would this setup suffice for the upcoming years and would it be considered a good comp in let's say four year's time

 

That is would I5 be good enough for that period or should i get a I7, and with DDR4(or GDDR5 whitchever they go with) launching in the near future then would a 2.4MHz be good enough.

Well future proofing a computer is debatable. Look at people saying that "The Q6600 is a better investment than the E8400 because it won't bottleneck as much in future". Whereas they're both irrelevant in the modern quad threaded age in terms of speed and both bottleneck.

[BrightCandle]

Well future proofing a computer is debatable. Look at people saying that "The Q6600 is a better investment than the E8400 because it won't bottleneck as much in future". Whereas they're both irrelevant in the modern quad threaded age in terms of speed and both bottleneck.

Exactly, there is no component you can buy to "future proof" a PC today, because the future proof part hasn't been invented yet. The Q6600 did perform better over its life and it did remain viable for a bit longer, but in the grand scheme of things its not a big improvement if it brings no benefit when you buy it. Its hard to justify an i7 today based on the software we have, multi threading software just hasn't materialized in the way most people wanted. I have very little in terms of extra tools today as a developer than I had 5 years ago for multi threading. There is no major advance that makes me think that software written now for the next few years will be dramatically more parallel than it was before. All the signs are that a quad core remains the sweet spot and that dual core is surprisingly close behind it.

[Faa]

Well future proofing a computer is debatable. Look at people saying that "The Q6600 is a better investment than the E8400 because it won't bottleneck as much in future". Whereas they're both irrelevant in the modern quad threaded age in terms of speed and both bottleneck.

The point is; when you're using stronger gpu's it will get intensiver on the cpu to keep up and with gpu's growing in performance like fuck every year so a 3930k would bottleneck much earlier than you expect. This theory doesnt apply to current cpu bound games such as WoW/PS2 etc because the cpu is already the bottleneck and all you will get from a gtx 1080 the exact same frames with much lower gpu loads.

How long did it take a 2600K to form a bottleneck in a game? Lets say a game that's very multithreading friendly and can push it to a 100%. 2 years only when Crysis 3 was released -> youtube.com/watch?v=_hcuYiqib9I (look after he applies a patch 100% cpu load 70%/70%/70% gpu load)

With gpu's same thing imo, doesnt really exist. A card usually never lives longer than 2-3 years unless you really want to play with the lowest settings..

Stuff that you can futureproof; a high quality psu over a shitty firework psu, a heatsink over an AIO because they tend to give up much earlier than the warranty expires, or maybe a case but in which ways? Build quality? It's not like you're throwing your pc everyday out of your window. Expendability? Double ball bearing over sleeve bearing? Logitech/Corsair peripherals over Razer?

In short, you cant futureproof performance only the lifespan really.. 

 

Exactly, there is no component you can buy to "future proof" a PC today, because the future proof part hasn't been invented yet. 

 

I know what you mean but it's something that chip manufacturers can't do. To give you a chip with 25 times more IPC you're going to need to break moore's law, just guessing blindly it would require a die size of 0.003nm who knows.

[Reddice]

So that really did answear my questions both Faa and Brightcandle solved it for me, am i able to choose 2 as solved??

[Reddice]

The point is; when you're using stronger gpu's it will get intensiver on the cpu to keep up and with gpu's growing in performance like fuck every year so a 3930k would bottleneck much earlier than you expect. This theory doesnt apply to current cpu bound games such as WoW/PS2 etc because the cpu is already the bottleneck and all you will get from a gtx 1080 the exact same frames with much lower gpu loads.

How long did it take a 2600K to form a bottleneck in a game? Lets say a game that's very multithreading friendly and can push it to a 100%. 2 years only when Crysis 3 was released -> youtube.com/watch?v=_hcuYiqib9I (look after he applies a patch 100% cpu load 70%/70%/70% gpu load)

With gpu's same thing imo, doesnt really exist. A card usually never lives longer than 2-3 years unless you really want to play with the lowest settings..

Stuff that you can futureproof; a high quality psu over a shitty firework psu, a heatsink over an AIO because they tend to give up much earlier than the warranty expires, or maybe a case but in which ways? Build quality? It's not like you're throwing your pc everyday out of your window. Expendability? Double ball bearing over sleeve bearing? Logitech/Corsair peripherals over Razer?

In short, you cant futureproof performance only the lifespan really.. 

 

 

I know what you mean but it's something that chip manufacturers can't do. To give you a chip with 25 times more IPC you're going to need to break moore's law, just guessing blindly it would require a die size of 0.003nm who knows.

 

 

The best strategy for good performance over the long term with computers is to buy at economically preferable points fairly regularly as the parts progress.  Different parts gain performance at different rates so the ideal price point and upgrade time period differs with each. GPUs are one of the faster growing areas and CPUs are now quite slow comparably.

 

Look at it this way - a hyperthreaded CPU like the 4770 verses the 4670 is at most 20% faster. Its only 20% faster in the really quite rare circumstances where a program uses 8 cores and does so using a widely mixed range of instructions across floating point and integer calculations. This isn't something you find in Movie encoding, in games or really general desktop use. It can describe compression but most of the benefit is in enterprise like applications and databases. That feature on its own is charged at $100. We have had it since the original i7 920 series some 5 years ago and to this day barely any desktop software has managed to use it. Is it likely thus to deliver benefit in the future? Maybe, but its far from certain that it will. The current evidence suggests its probably not going to be critical.

 

My main advice is don't try and buy a machine that will last 5 years, instead buy reasonably priced performance machines today and save that money and buy upgrades an replacements in a year or two's time. You'll maintain better performance over the life of the PC and it will cost you less. Unlike the laptop and tablet users you wont be required to upgrade everything, so the HDD can stay as is and most likely you'll only be compelled to replace the CPU in 5 years or whereas the GPU will probably want 2 yearly upgrades.

il just do it this way then thanks guy's