When do core parts become obsolete

[LarsRIP]

Hello!

 

It's been a couple of years since I kept proper up to date with all the technology advancements in the PC universe. I've been looking to upgrade my GPU for a little while now, and will do to a 1080 or 1070. But ever since one of my MOSFETs on my motherboard decided to melt, killing off my good old Z77 ASUS V GENE and 3570K, I have been looking at some new stuff to buy. With innovation moving so slowly the last few years outside GPU technology, when do you guys reckon things will pick up again? and when do you think new technology will "force" a upgrade? As I said I'm not extremely up to date, so is there anything on the horizon that could bring an actual incentive for people on Sandy or Ivy Bridge to upgrade? DDR4 for example does not bring any impressive performance gains for a generational shift, nor does Skylake.

 

I'm guessing there is no need for a PCIe 4.0 standard as of yet. However how long do you guys think it will take before PCIe 4.0 or a new SATA standard would be 'needed' or implemented? Or another form of technology that would be a proper selling point for new hardware? I am contemplating at the moment to wait a little while for Intel (or AMD for that matter) to release a new CPU generation and with that new motherboards following, it is my guess however that I might as well just buy current Skylake hardware as there is such little innovation. Thoughts? 

[Mr.Meerkat]

This depends but I still find it amusing how x7xx chipset motherboards were the first to natively support all three new gen of standards known as USB3.0, SATA 3 (6gbps) and PCIe 3.0  (on intel's side)...

[Humble_newbie]

This is how I look at it,

 

More and more companies are targeting an engineering advancement of around 20-30% more power while also improving 20-30% more efficiency. If you look at it this way, skylake is more power efficient for the same or better performance depending on the model. DDR4 is less power hungry.Companies are also trying to bring in more tech into single processor than ever before, plus there is a lot of advancement into mobile processor. they are less power hungry giving more battery life in laptops.  But if you want to upgrade, it totally depends on the budget and the PSU you have currently. If you have a 500W PSU, then upgrade to parts that use less power so you wont have to spend that 60-90$ in a new PSU, Its totally upto you. 

[LarsRIP]

10 minutes ago, Humble_newbie said:

This is how I look at it,

 

More and more companies are targeting an engineering advancement of around 20-30% more power while also improving 20-30% more efficiency. If you look at it this way, skylake is more power efficient for the same or better performance depending on the model. DDR4 is less power hungry.Companies are also trying to bring in more tech into single processor than ever before, plus there is a lot of advancement into mobile processor. they are less power hungry giving more battery life in laptops.  But if you want to upgrade, it totally depends on the budget and the PSU you have currently. If you have a 500W PSU, then upgrade to parts that use less power so you wont have to spend that 60-90$ in a new PSU, Its totally upto you. 

This is very true. Efficiency is basically what seems to be the constant target recently. I'm sorry I didn't properly specify, I'm thinking about the desktop performance side of things. I have a super cheap ASUS Eeebook that has 12hrs battery life time that does not need any fans to stay cool. So I am aware there are some great leaps in this perspective of things. CPUs and such running cooler and consuming less power is a nice aspect for overclocking and desktops in general, I agree. I do really wish there were some performance leaps too though, Intel's domination of the performance market over the recent years has not helped this situation either. Hope Zen can bring some nice competition again. 

I'll add that I have a 850w PSU as I have been running SLI for a couple of years. It's interesting how fast GPU seems to be moving compared to CPU technology, but it makes sense since the demand for innovation in GPU technology has far outpaced CPU, outside professional workloads. 

[Humble_newbie]

The thing is most tech advance comes in pro grade hardware like servers and such and then when they become cheaper, they make their way towards consumer desktops. Servers and datacenters save money by less heat and electric bill when you run thousands of processors 20W less. So thats where the market it going.  

[Mira Yurizaki]

"When do core parts become obsolete?" When they become obsolete to you.

 

I've come to define obsolescence as this: does the hardware still meet your requirements? And requirements aren't necessarily performance based either. Maybe I want a GPU with DX12 support, even though what I have is faster than what's around (let's just be hypothetical about this).

 

This is why I've become a little obsessive about characterizing the performance of things as much as I can. Whenever I get a new machine, I always try to include something new to throw on to test it out. If I don't know what something does and how it does, then I can't really tune my requirements very well.

 

Here's another thing to consider. Why of all the processors NASA chose, did they go with a MIPS R3000 for the New Horizon's probe? This is a processor from the late 80s and its last well known application was being the main processor for the first PlayStation? Because NASA has a set of requirements and nothing else around on the market would meet them. Even though one would easily say the MIPS R3000 is obsolete, to NASA, it's the best thing they can stick on a probe.

 

You have to consider the whole system, what it can do, and what your exact, verifiable requirements are.

[MiketheGingerGuy]

What my opinion is that upgradability should be when there is some huge advancement or some sort of obvious upgrade, kind of like how when steam vr performance test was released everyone thought about upgrading. Not nessicarly got vr but so that their system isn't so far behind. For me with graphics cards is every 2 years and starting the third generation after your last upgrade, you buy the 2nd gen after, because prices will be lower. EX you have card 0 three years come by and 3 is about to be released a few weeks after 3 is released buy what was "top of the line" for 2