Discussion Forums > Technology
Upgrading CPU
ant900:
--- Quote from: nstgc on April 15, 2010, 10:34:26 PM ---
--- Quote from: ant900 on April 15, 2010, 09:58:19 PM ---
--- Quote from: nstgc on April 15, 2010, 08:56:40 PM ---There is no such thing as future-proofing. I find that its best to buy not so new stuff more frequently. Its cheaper to do it that way. I'd rather upgrade a few things every year than upgrade those same things every 4 years.
--- End quote ---
Obviously it won't be 100% future proof, but I don't plan on spending money on hardware every year, hell I wasn't even expecting to do this upgrade, but the i7 just sort of dropped out of the sky so I figured I might as well use it. After this upgrade I don't plan on doing anything else beyond utilizing SLI for quite a while (much more than 4 years).
--- End quote ---
Actually its cheaper to upgrade a few components every year to keep them up than it is to upgrade everything every 4 years.
--- End quote ---
That is assuming that I would be buying the top of the line hardware (or even the really good hardware), and like I said I plan on keeping the new build as is for a lot longer than 4 years.
fohfoh:
--- Quote from: ant900 on April 15, 2010, 10:50:56 PM ---
--- Quote from: nstgc on April 15, 2010, 10:34:26 PM ---
--- Quote from: ant900 on April 15, 2010, 09:58:19 PM ---
--- Quote from: nstgc on April 15, 2010, 08:56:40 PM ---There is no such thing as future-proofing. I find that its best to buy not so new stuff more frequently. Its cheaper to do it that way. I'd rather upgrade a few things every year than upgrade those same things every 4 years.
--- End quote ---
Obviously it won't be 100% future proof, but I don't plan on spending money on hardware every year, hell I wasn't even expecting to do this upgrade, but the i7 just sort of dropped out of the sky so I figured I might as well use it. After this upgrade I don't plan on doing anything else beyond utilizing SLI for quite a while (much more than 4 years).
--- End quote ---
Actually its cheaper to upgrade a few components every year to keep them up than it is to upgrade everything every 4 years.
--- End quote ---
That is assuming that I would be buying the top of the line hardware (or even the really good hardware), and like I said I plan on keeping the new build as is for a lot longer than 4 years.
--- End quote ---
Agreed.
But seriously, the savings you get aren't that huge when compared over several years. We're looking at something like 50-100 bucks a year or like 4-10 bucks a month overall. Personally, I'm not that stingy AND I give away most of my old stuff when upgrade anyways. So I really don't care about stuff like the "Time value of money". In all seriousness, I need to upgrade, I pool up money, make a budget and go. I need a desktop soon but the idea will be the same. I'll make a budget (probably 800-1200 CAD) build a computer that fits my needs and if it's below budget, it's a bonus. Within budget, it's expected. Higher than budget, I'll consider if I need to. And upgrades wise? Only if I feel that I could have a better experience if I do so. (Generally cheap things like RAM, HDD etc. and not huge overhauls). Either that, I just consider a new computer.
Really considering an i7 build for my desktop and gaming needs. I like what I've seen so far with the one I built for my work place and the price is about what I'd consider spending. I'd rather spend the extra cash to spend less time on my computer. A few hours is ok for a fix here and there, but not like days and weeks spent to figure out OCing etc. (I'm a n00b and it's not worth my time. I'd rather spend that time on other more entertaining things) Not that I'd have huge issues with like the difference between 2.53GHz vs 2.73Ghz. I can wait a few seconds. Upgradability isn't something I weigh high. But functionality is what I weigh highly.
nstgc:
My logic is that if you switch out components more frequently keeps your computer at a base line. If you upgrade every 4 years your computer, by the end of that 4 year period, is a piece of shit. To avoid this you would have to start with an absurdly good, and expensive, machine. The value of my computer bounces between 800 and 1000 dollars. This, however, doesn't mean I have to drop 800 dollars every year. If I were to buy a computer now that would be that good 4 years from now, surely I would end up spending over 2000 dollars. Many parts don't need to be replaced frequently. Cases and optical drives, for instance, are good for quite a while.
Additionally you reduce the chances of failure due to age.
One downside is the bottlenecking. I upgraded my video card from an nVidia 8600 GT to a Radeon 3870. My CPU was a major bottle neck.
[edit] As an example, consider that Radeon 3870. Four years ago, not even the top of the line video card would be able to compete with that. I also would assume that whatever the top of the line at that time was, would have made up more than half the value of the entire computer. In order for it not be be bottle necked like mad, I would have also had to have an expensive CPU. For the CPU not to have been choked, I would have had to have at least decent RAM.
[edit2] I'm currently waiting for either the price of the 5770 to drop to $150 or the end of the semester. I also will likely buy, this year, a new hard drive, for no more than $150. I don't expect any other expenses. So a good guess as to my yearly computer expenditures will be $310.
ant900:
--- Quote from: nstgc on April 15, 2010, 11:34:56 PM ---My logic is that if you switch out components more frequently keeps your computer at a base line. If you upgrade every 4 years your computer, by the end of that 4 year period, is a piece of shit. To avoid this you would have to start with an absurdly good, and expensive, machine. The value of my computer bounces between 800 and 1000 dollars. This, however, doesn't mean I have to drop 800 dollars every year. If I were to buy a computer now that would be that good 4 years from now, surely I would end up spending over 2000 dollars. Many parts don't need to be replaced frequently. Cases and optical drives, for instance, are good for quite a while.
Additionally you reduce the chances of failure due to age.
One downside is the bottlenecking. I upgraded my video card from an nVidia 8600 GT to a Radeon 3870. My CPU was a major bottle neck.
[edit] As an example, consider that Radeon 3870. Four years ago, not even the top of the line video card would be able to compete with that. I also would assume that whatever the top of the line at that time was, would have made up more than half the value of the entire computer. In order for it not be be bottle necked like mad, I would have also had to have an expensive CPU. For the CPU not to have been choked, I would have had to have at least decent RAM.
[edit2] I'm currently waiting for either the price of the 5770 to drop to $150 or the end of the semester. I also will likely buy, this year, a new hard drive, for no more than $150. I don't expect any other expenses. So a good guess as to my yearly computer expenditures will be $310.
--- End quote ---
I'm not saying what you are doing is wrong, in fact if you want to keep your computer running the best games on good hardware, it is probably the best option, I am just saying that it doesn't apply to me. I do not mind playing games on substandard graphics. Hell I was playing Left 4 Dead on a Pentium IV with some random outdated Radeon graphics card up until I got my current rig late '08 (Had that computer for probably 5-7 years, upgraded graphics card once).
Anyways this talk is a bit off topic and I'm not entirely sure how we got on it in the first place.
I should be getting the Mobo sometime next week, and then after I get some DDR3 memory I'll upgrade the computer once I don't have any work to do :)
Stsin:
If staying with Intel, by going by their past record, it's best to upgrade the whole lot at once. With their CPUs requiring new MBs and RAM, it's not wise to plan on upgrade paths when using Intel CPUs.
I used to get complete new systems often, from one of the first Pentiums, Pentium IIs using slot 2, to PIII's requiring MBs using the expensive Rambus RAM. Not any real upgrade paths with them. Then AMD came along and gained the lead shortly, and switched to that. And was able to just upgrade their CPUs when needed. And while using AMD, I've learned it's silly to keep buying the top.
My $500 system from over a year ago, buying AMD's 940 BE Quad when released, is still a great system today. Scoring 9.4+ on all Win7 Index, except for my Caviar Black Drives (5.9). I don't feel behind at all with the latest I7's being released today nor I doubt from a year from now either, and I don't even overclock it. Though I did OC it just to see how far it will go on a stock system, but realized it's not needed with such little actual gain.
With something that you'll upgrade every few years, should look at the best bang for the buck. And with most systems, upgrade the whole package, MB, RAM, CPU, and OS to get the most out of it.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version