How long will my custom built PC last?

[Icebonez]

Hey guys. So I've had a store bought pc for the past 3 years or so and I'm looking to upgrade. The components are all store bought so I'm looking for a fresh build.

 

Here are the specs:
CPU: AMD FX-9590
CPU Cooler: Corsair H100i GTX 70.7 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler
Motherboard: MSI 990FXA-GAMING ATX AM3+/AM3 Motherboard
RAM: Corsair Vengeance Pro DDR3-2400 16GB (4 x 4GB)
HDD: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM
Case: NZXT H440 (Black/Red) ATX Mid Tower Case
Power Supply: EVGA SuperNOVA P2 650W 80+ Platinum Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply
GPU: MSI GTX 970 OC
SSD: Samsung 850 EVO

 

I already have the GTX 970, SSD, a monitor and peripherals such as keyboard, mouse, speakers, ect. so I put the extra money into the board, CPU, and cooler. How long does this look to last if its taken great care of? I'm hoping to get about 6 years or so out of it if that is possible but I want to see what you guys think. Thanks!

 

Parts List: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/JCNs6h  (Excluding SSD and GPU)

[othertomperson]

For the love of god don't buy an FX 9590.

[Icebonez]

1 minute ago, othertomperson said:

For the love of god don't buy an FX 9590.

Why not exactly? I haven't heard anything bad about them and it seemed like a pretty good deal. Then again this is my first custom build

[Zeke]

Chances are you'll replace the system because it becomes obsolete, not because it breaks down. 

 

Also, don't pair GTX970 with that CPU. 

[Icebonez]

1 minute ago, Zeke said:

Chances are you'll replace the system because it becomes obsolete, not because it breaks down. 

 

Also, don't pair GTX970 with that CPU. 

Why not?

[mikat]

1 minute ago, Icebonez said:

Why not?

because it's super hot and it's not very good in single threaded applications, you're better off with an i5

[Kobathor]

Don't get the 9590. Don't do it. Don't. Do. It. Stop. 

OK, now that that's out of my system

 

With the 9590, probably not that long. I suggest going with this: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/3s62qs i5-6600k and a Z170 board.

 

5 minutes ago, Icebonez said:

Why not exactly? I haven't heard anything bad about them and it seemed like a pretty good deal. Then again this is my first custom build

Bulldozer is a bad architecture (what the 9590 is.) The per-core performance is bad, even at high clock speeds, and games run pretty bad. Look up some reviews and you'll see what I'm talking about. The i5 will actually perform better than the FX.

[Bigheart]

1 minute ago, Icebonez said:

Why not?

cause the cpu will bottleneck that gpu. and that is no fun for anybody. 

[Bigheart]

Just now, Bigheart said:

cause the cpu will bottleneck that gpu. and that is no fun for anybody. 

and its super hot

[Levent]

I wouldnt personally go anything with AM3+ platform as there have been no new releases for a while, you might as well go with an regular i5 on newer socket (not sure what that would be) and upgrade when you really need to.

[Zeke]

10 minutes ago, Icebonez said:

Why not exactly? I haven't heard anything bad about them and it seemed like a pretty good deal. Then again this is my first custom build

I'm assuming you're going to use this for gaming, and for that even an i5 beats FX9590, so you'd be much better off buying that. Get an i7 if your budget allows that. Yes, in raw numbers AMD seems better, but any non-synthetic benchmark or CPU test will prove otherwise. Also Intel CPUs tend to run much, much cooler, meaning that if you get a K-series CPU and a mobo that supports overclocking, you'll be able to get quite a nice stable overclock with that cooling system of yours.

[Icebonez]

3 minutes ago, Kobathor said:

Don't get the 9590. Don't do it. Don't. Do. It. Stop. 

OK, now that that's out of my system

 

With the 9590, probably not that long. I suggest going with this: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/HhsMP6 i5-6500 and a Z170 board. Z170 so you can upgrade to an i7-6700k later. I kept the water cooler so, well, you could upgrade to an unlocked chip later.

 

Bulldozer is a bad architecture (what the 9590 is.) The per-core performance is bad, even at high clock speeds, and games run pretty bad. Look up some reviews and you'll see what I'm talking about. The i5 will actually perform better than the FX.

From benchmarks it didn't look too bad tbh. So just go with a regular i5 or i7? I want to get the best and longest lasting rig i can buy without going broke so I'm open to suggestions.

[RAAL4]

What is your budget?

do you already have an OS, if not include it in your budget.

 

[TheRandomness]

Just now, Icebonez said:

From benchmarks it didn't look too bad tbh. So just go with a regular i5 or i7? I want to get the best and longest lasting rig i can buy without going broke so I'm open to suggestions.

i5-6600k. Like this list:

8 minutes ago, Kobathor said:

Don't get the 9590. Don't do it. Don't. Do. It. Stop. 

OK, now that that's out of my system

 

With the 9590, probably not that long. I suggest going with this: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/3s62qs i5-6600k and a Z170 board.

 

Bulldozer is a bad architecture (what the 9590 is.) The per-core performance is bad, even at high clock speeds, and games run pretty bad. Look up some reviews and you'll see what I'm talking about. The i5 will actually perform better than the FX.

 

[Icebonez]

3 minutes ago, RAAL4 said:

What is your budget?

do you already have an OS, if not include it in your budget.

 

OS is covered, and since I have the GPU and SSD, around $800

[Kobathor]

6 minutes ago, Icebonez said:

From benchmarks it didn't look too bad tbh. So just go with a regular i5 or i7? I want to get the best and longest lasting rig i can buy without going broke so I'm open to suggestions.

I added the 6600k and mobo, and it's about the exact same as the 9590/mobo. The 6600k will most likely last you more than 4 years, but only time will tell. In time, you can even upgrade it to an i7-6700k for more horsepower without upgrading your motherboard.

[RAAL4]

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/ywwDrH

 

The case is a placeholder, you can pick your own

[Icebonez]

So basically the general consensus is don't get an AMD for gaming? I figured that from the start but after reviewing some benchmarks they looked pretty solid, but guess not lol 

[RAAL4]

there good for very tight budget gaming, like $600 for everything tight budget.

[Icebonez]

So an i5-6600k is gonna be perfect for what I'm looking at?

[Kobathor]

4 minutes ago, Icebonez said:

So basically the general consensus is don't get an AMD for gaming? I figured that from the start but after reviewing some benchmarks they looked pretty solid, but guess not lol 

Some games are totally fine with the FX line of CPU's. But some games, like Fallout 4, tank in performance.

2 minutes ago, Icebonez said:

So an i5-6600k is gonna be perfect for what I'm looking at?

Yes.

[Icebonez]

Alright, and the ASRock Z170 Gaming will be exactly what I need, performance and efficiency wise?

[Rolling Potatoe]

20 minutes ago, Icebonez said:

From benchmarks it didn't look too bad tbh. So just go with a regular i5 or i7? I want to get the best and longest lasting rig i can buy without going broke so I'm open to suggestions.

Assuming that you use it for gaming it really isnt very good.

For gaming you need good single core performance, and while in recent years some games

could make use of 8 cores or so, the majority needs 2-4 still and will for some while.

The 9590 is practically an overclocked 8350 (from 2012!) and even then the single core performance was 

bad compared to intels cpus. 

While intel improved year by year amd didnt release anything good in years,

even with a stupidly overclocked cpu that uses as much wattage as an high gpu

a 100$ or so i3 still has better single core performance by 50% or so.

If you overclock a recent i5 or i7 (which you can do alot, unlike the amd processor) even the multi core performance of 

a 9590 is only comparable at best (my i5 6600k has a better cinebench multi score than a 9590) while having only half the single core performance.

 

The bottom line is the am3+ plattform is dead and outdated, and intel has better offerings for almost every scenario right now (thats why amd fanboys pray for Zen to be good......I mean amd doesnt even have pcie 3.0, were getting 4.0 next year....)

[DaltonM]

I feel that Skylake and DDR4 aren't worth it for gamers.

 

The i5-4690k is barely cheaper than the 6600k, but the mobo and DDR4 are more expensive too.

 

I suggest a 4690k, I use one at stock speeds. 

 

The 4690k at stock speeds will last years, there's no game out that comes close to maxing out on this. In a few years it will become a slight bottleneck in some instances for some games. At that point you could start to OC your chip to hold you over until you naturally upgrade.

 

When making a PC, the most important part is everything... But the GPU. You should spend as much as you can on a CPU, unless you don't need the extra power (i7 are pointless for only gamers). Build a system that only need's its gpu updated every few years. 

[Rolling Potatoe]

3 minutes ago, DaltonM said:

I feel that Skylake and DDR4 aren't worth it for gamers.

 

The i5-4690k is barely cheaper than the 6600k, but the mobo and DDR4 are more expensive too.

 

I suggest a 4690k, I use one at stock speeds. 

 

 

Check again, ddr 4 prices have dropped, you can get 16 gb for 60 bucks.

Mobos are priced also about the same, a budged z170 board cost like 100$.

 

I would go for skylake though even if there werent the 5-10% ipc improvement and lower power usage,

the ultra m.2 and usb 3.1 connectivity would be worth it alone.

 

Anyway if its supposed to last for years it might be worth it to get an i7 instead of an i5, the hyperthreading on 4 cores starts to give you some noticeable extra performance in some newer titles.