The 10 year plan computer

[Desktopstu]

I am building a `10 year (and a bit) plan` pc. That is, a pc thats going to last me 10 years. There are a few select upgrades along the path due to fund constraints which i will explain shortly...

PC is predominantly to be a gaming and office platform. Id like to play some games such as Cyberpunk, Baldurs 3, Red Dead. I currently play World of Tanks a lot. Id like to try some RT but thats not the big show stopper for me. I like my games with high graphics settings as Im notthat much of a competitive games player.

I want the end pc to last a long time before needing an upgrade. In fact I intend to hold it to the 10 year plan if i can.

Case - is the simply huge Thermaltake level 10 battle edition. Its old, rare and very roomy. Lots of fan options and room for pretty much any size graphics card.
CPU - Currently a `free` i5 10400F cpu. Its a temporary cpu as I plan to aquire either an i7 11700 or i9 11900 sometime later this year which is pretty much the most powerful cpu i can use on this sytem.
Motherboard - A mid range ASrock B560 Steel Legend motherboard. This board will stay for the duration of the 10 year build.
RAM - 2 x 8gb 3200 speed Silicaon Power DDR4 which works nice and stable on XMP2 with CAS 16 so pretty typical Samsung module memory really. This may stay or may get upgraded to 32gb.
Storage - 500gb Fikwot (yeah i never heard of them either!) PCIE gen 3 M.2 drive in the second M.2 slot. The first slot doesnt appear to work while a 10th gen cpu is used, I believe a 11th gen cpu is needed to allow the 4th gen primary slot to be used. I plan to upgrade this to a Samsing 980 1tb drive after the cpu is upgraded. There are a few mechanical drives attached to store my Steam catalogue of games.
Graphics - Currently has a humble GTX 970, In the long term I want to buy an ASrock Steel Legend 7900 GRE as from a performance point of view I think this would work out well and from an asthetics point of view I think it would look real nice with the Steel Legend motherboard. I may swap out the 970 for something like a RTX 3070 temporarily until I can afford the 7900.
PSU - Currently sporting a GameMax 700w Rampage modular psu. Yeah I know its reputation but these have served me well to date. I do plan to put a more respected psu in this build but I dont know what yet.

Why have i taken the backward step of buying 10th / 11th gen intel instead of intel 12th or Ryzen? I have had AM4 builds for years and I like them but wanted a change. I bought into 10/11th gen due to the year of manufacture, that is 2020-2021. 1If you went back in time 10 years from 2021 to 2011 the king of cpus was Sandybridge i7 2600 / 2700 which even now some 13 years later would still be a useable cpu today. I want to see that this build can stand a similar test of time and i can come back to the forum in 2034 and show how well the pc is coping.

My biggest issue is funds. This build is being funded by my selling off pc hardware I have lying around and this is taking time. Ive currently got two more pcs to sell, my AM4 rig that should raise about £300 and an older 3rd gen i5 that should raise about £100, Add to that another £200 ive saved up selling other odds and ends. I dont want to cut too many corners but I also cant just splash the cash. So here are my dilemas:

What PSU should I get? needs to be reasonably priced but also decent reliability and capable of powering the cpu and gpu.

Should I opt for the i9 (currently priced around £200) or the i7 (currently priced around £160)? Would I see that much gains with i9?

Should I go witht he Samsung 980 storage? or would a cheaper alternative fit the bill? The mechanical drives I have fit in the removable drive bays and are ok for some of the indie games I have but not the latest games id like to play.

Would I benefit from faster RAM?

Graphics. BIG question! Should I invest in something better than the 970 now, something like a 3070 maybe? (currently available with warranty for £270) or hold off till I can raise the £530 for the steel legend version of 7900 GRE?

In what order should I make these purchases?


Your advice and opinions most welcome.

 

[dj-electric]

There's one take im going to throw here -
You can have hardware that may by a chance last 10 years.
You cannot always have hardware that supports all software functions in 10 years relevancy with contemporary software \ games.

20 years deep and never pulling out, my 2 cents is that building a good and reliable machine every 4-6 years twice is a far better choice than daydreaming of a 10 year lasting computer.

 

[Desktopstu]

There's one take im going to throw here -
You can have hardware that may by a chance last 10 years.
You cannot always have hardware that supports all software functions in 10 years relevancy with contemporary software \ games.

Abolutely. I mean look at how Microsoft tried to cut off all cpus older than 7th gen intel / 2ng gen Ryzen with their `new` windows 11 security requirements? Its not a fool proof plan as nothing can be said to be future proof. That said, look at how well the likes of Sandybridge lasted? I still have a couple of pcs here with Sandy CPUs still going strong.

 

[nomdeplume]

I'd suggest pausing for a moment that allows taking prices out of the equation in order to focus on the true purpose and performance of modern day hardware. Not an easy assessment to make. One that is intentionally and pervasively complicated beyond untangling. If one line can be established throughout it would be the importance of matching similar capability hardware even if it appears a specific game itself invalidates need for it.

At least one member here uses an i3 and 3060ti quite capably. With realistic expectations. Just don't overspend or fail to be happy with what you can put together.

 

[dj-electric]

Abolutely. I mean look at how Microsoft tried to cut off all cpus older than 7th gen intel / 2ng gen Ryzen with their `new` windows 11 security requirements? Its not a fool proof plan as nothing can be said to be future proof. That said, look at how well the likes of Sandybridge lasted? I still have a couple of pcs here with Sandy CPUs still going strong.

There's a paradox in the retrospective of how long certain components last. The paradox is that the speed in which technology progresses often isn't linear, there are spikes, and Sandy Bridge happened to surf on a relatively CPU-relaxed first few years of software and game demands. 7th gen had less time in the spotlights to do this since avg game CPU demands spiked quite dramatically comes PS5 XBSX era.

There are absolutely no lenses long and clear enough to recommend anyone on this green and blue planet a "last forever" 10 year old computer. The best you can do and should do is simply tune whatever machine you can buy the right way with your budget to maximize the performance it can grant you today and simply surf on those abilities for as long as release waves will allow.

Future outlooks can include increased memory capacity, stronger GPUs, future slot-in CPU replacement motherboard socket etc.

 

[cvaldes]

There's also the performance-per-watt metric.

In just a few years there will be something that'll outperform your "10 year computer" at half price and use a third of the power.

I have a Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 580, a respectable card when it debuted nearly 7 years ago. It does the same things that it did in 2017. But people expect more from their technology every year. The card is basically a tired old card that uses WAY too much energy for what it does. Hell, I don't even want to use it in a desktop productivity PC.

My daily driver Windows box is a $180 mini PC powered by an Intel N100 (Intel says the SoC TDP is 6W), the graphics cores use about 0.1W at idle. The CPU cores use 0.6W at idle.

One thing for sure, there will be newer usage cases that require technologies unavailable before. I have started dabbling with some image and video upscaling tools (Upscayl and Waifu2x Extension GUI). These applications are effectively unusable with the RX 580. Even a wimpy B-stock EVGA RTX 3060 blows doors on the old Radeon card.

 

[Space Lynx]

I am building a `10 year (and a bit) plan` pc. That is, a pc thats going to last me 10 years. There are a few select upgrades along the path due to fund constraints which i will explain shortly...

PC is predominantly to be a gaming and office platform. Id like to play some games such as Cyberpunk, Baldurs 3, Red Dead. I currently play World of Tanks a lot. Id like to try some RT but thats not the big show stopper for me. I like my games with high graphics settings as Im notthat much of a competitive games player.

I want the end pc to last a long time before needing an upgrade. In fact I intend to hold it to the 10 year plan if i can.

Case - is the simply huge Thermaltake level 10 battle edition. Its old, rare and very roomy. Lots of fan options and room for pretty much any size graphics card.
CPU - Currently a `free` i5 10400F cpu. Its a temporary cpu as I plan to aquire either an i7 11700 or i9 11900 sometime later this year which is pretty much the most powerful cpu i can use on this sytem.
Motherboard - A mid range ASrock B560 Steel Legend motherboard. This board will stay for the duration of the 10 year build.
RAM - 2 x 8gb 3200 speed Silicaon Power DDR4 which works nice and stable on XMP2 with CAS 16 so pretty typical Samsung module memory really. This may stay or may get upgraded to 32gb.
Storage - 500gb Fikwot (yeah i never heard of them either!) PCIE gen 3 M.2 drive in the second M.2 slot. The first slot doesnt appear to work while a 10th gen cpu is used, I believe a 11th gen cpu is needed to allow the 4th gen primary slot to be used. I plan to upgrade this to a Samsing 980 1tb drive after the cpu is upgraded. There are a few mechanical drives attached to store my Steam catalogue of games.
Graphics - Currently has a humble GTX 970, In the long term I want to buy an ASrock Steel Legend 7900 GRE as from a performance point of view I think this would work out well and from an asthetics point of view I think it would look real nice with the Steel Legend motherboard. I may swap out the 970 for something like a RTX 3070 temporarily until I can afford the 7900.
PSU - Currently sporting a GameMax 700w Rampage modular psu. Yeah I know its reputation but these have served me well to date. I do plan to put a more respected psu in this build but I dont know what yet.

Why have i taken the backward step of buying 10th / 11th gen intel instead of intel 12th or Ryzen? I have had AM4 builds for years and I like them but wanted a change. I bought into 10/11th gen due to the year of manufacture, that is 2020-2021. 1If you went back in time 10 years from 2021 to 2011 the king of cpus was Sandybridge i7 2600 / 2700 which even now some 13 years later would still be a useable cpu today. I want to see that this build can stand a similar test of time and i can come back to the forum in 2034 and show how well the pc is coping.

My biggest issue is funds. This build is being funded by my selling off pc hardware I have lying around and this is taking time. Ive currently got two more pcs to sell, my AM4 rig that should raise about £300 and an older 3rd gen i5 that should raise about £100, Add to that another £200 ive saved up selling other odds and ends. I dont want to cut too many corners but I also cant just splash the cash. So here are my dilemas:

What PSU should I get? needs to be reasonably priced but also decent reliability and capable of powering the cpu and gpu.

Should I opt for the i9 (currently priced around £200) or the i7 (currently priced around £160)? Would I see that much gains with i9?

Should I go witht he Samsung 980 storage? or would a cheaper alternative fit the bill? The mechanical drives I have fit in the removable drive bays and are ok for some of the indie games I have but not the latest games id like to play.

Would I benefit from faster RAM?

Graphics. BIG question! Should I invest in something better than the 970 now, something like a 3070 maybe? (currently available with warranty for £270) or hold off till I can raise the £530 for the steel legend version of 7900 GRE?

In what order should I make these purchases?


Your advice and opinions most welcome.

If you still have older backlog games to play, the 970 should be just fine for those still. I say make no changes to this, leave the CPU alone too, 6 core 10th gen isn't bad by any means for a budget rig, I really don't think you would gain much by upgrading the CPU for gaming to be honest.

Instead keep saving your money, and maybe next year around this try to find a 4070 or 4070 SUPER second hand for cheap or on eBay UK, or see what your options are when the time comes that your 970 can no longer satisfy your backlog of games.

honestly a 10th gen 6 core CPU + a 4070 would be a good rig, especially since you could use frame gen for like cyberpunk 2077 and future games.

so my vote goes to save money, keep the CPU the same, and just keep saving up for a 4070, 4070 ti, 4070 SUPER (depending what your budget ends up allowing, what good deals you find). I think frame gen at a low resolution say 1080p or 1440p max will see you through 10 years. just keep in mind you have to be open minded regarding using medium/high settings and not max in-game to really get the fps you may desire.

Ram is dirt cheap, so i'd buy 2 more sticks of 8gb x3200, doesn't have to be the same brand, but if possible make it so, then just turn on XMP. filling all 4 ram slots can be beneficial in some scenarios. and its dirt cheap to do so, so might as well.

 

[Dr. Dro]

If it's 10 years from today, then I don't think this holds. If it's a 10 year from Rocket Lake's launch, you're by Year 4 already. It'd be its mid-point upgrade, so by any means, you should get the i9-11900, 32GB RAM, upgrade storage, and hold onto it for the second half, perhaps?

In general, what do you want to do with this computer? 10 years from now is Q2 2034. There'll be calculators faster than this system by then.

 

[Marcus L]

If it's 10 years from today, then I don't think this holds. If it's a 10 year from Rocket Lake's launch, you're by Year 4 already. It'd be its mid-point upgrade, so by any means, you should get the i9-11900, 32GB RAM, upgrade storage, and hold onto it for the second half, perhaps?

In general, what do you want to do with this computer? 10 years from now is Q2 2034. There'll be calculators faster than this system by then.

Where are these magical calculators today that are faster than an i7 4790k?or 4960x

 

[freeagent]

Where are these magical calculators today that are faster than an i7 4790k?or 4960x

A modern phone

 

[Dr. Dro]

Where are these magical calculators today that are faster than an i7 4790k?or 4960x

In your pocket. It's called whatever midrange cell phone you've got. Counts as a calculator, right?

 

[freeagent]

I would aim lower and spend less, 10 years is a long time and that is a lot of commitment. I built a 10 year machine once.. not on purpose. It isn't fun, especially when you try to compete with guys on newer machines. Tech moved pretty quick in those 10 years. But in the end you have to be honest with yourself, and your needs, especially if money is a factor. If you happen to toast a mobo, or a PSU or something, you will be able to swap it out and just feel a little sting of inconvenience, rather than a gut punch of disappointment.

 

[Marcus L]

In your pocket. It's called whatever midrange cell phone you've got. Counts as a calculator, right?

A modern phone

You said a calculator, there has been a massive upswing in mobile devices, phones between today and 2013, but you are talking out of your ass saying a calculator has more processing power than a flagship x86 CPU from 2013 don't change the goalposts after you talked rubbish, awww bless you both liked each others posts, that's cute....

On topic however OP would definitely benefit from going with an AM5 system as it will likely see 2-3 more gens than the current 7000 series CPU's bringing it's life cycle to at least 5 years if AM4 is anything to go by, this would require a CPU upgrade midway through it's lifespan however and a GPU at around the same time or later down the road, but no DDR4 system let alone intel 10/11 is going to be able to last 10 years for anything meaningful unless you understand you need to do a midlife upgrade on the most important parts, Intel 10/11 obviously you do not have this luxury.

All that aside, in 10 years that system will also likely draw 3-4x more power than a comparable system even with said upgrades, 5 years is very much more realistic, who knows, in 10 years we will most likely be jacked up into a brain-AI neural network quantum computer

 

[mechtech]

Where are these magical calculators today that are faster than an i7 4790k?or 4960x

Hey at least a slide rule does not require power.

On topic,

I've used PC for almost that long built it in hmmmm summer 2009, and my mom is still using it.

So over the 8 years I had it.
-increase ram size and speed
-increased SSD storage amount
-upgraded GPU

If you are going to try to get 10 years out of it, I would go for..........

-32GB of ram, check Jedec SPD vs XMP profiles - look for something with the fastest JEDEC clocks and voltages, and the XMP profile is just icing on the cake.
-PSU look for something with at least 10yr warranty and latest ATX spec if possible
-also might need a mobo/cmos coin cell battery after 7-8 years
-probably better to go beefier on the CPU because 7 years down the road might not be able to find one that will fit in the mobo/socket or at a decent price
-gpu well can go lighter on this since odds are 6+ years down the road they will still have a PCIe slot (easily upgradeable)
-maybe win 10 ent/ltsc IoT?? version..............I see posts on it, but I run regular W10pro

Having said that............as other have said, I typically build a new PC about every 6 years and just gift my old one to whomever needs it the most. Typically I don't really upgrade anything over the 6 years.

 

[Keullo-e]

Sandy/Ivy/Haswell/Westmere is still usable if you don't need the top of the line performance, but it's hard to predict how things will be in 2034 if you'll get a higher mid-end platform now.

Personally I'll probably switch to AM5 (7700X or 7800X3D) next year or something just that I can also upgrade my 2nd PC with my current gaming rig's parts.

 

[Dr. Dro]

You said a calculator, there has been a massive upswing in mobile devices, phones between today and 2013, but you are talking out of your ass saying a calculator has more processing power than a flagship x86 CPU from 2013 don't change the goalposts after you talked rubbish, awww bless you both liked each others posts, that's cute....

Uh, mate. You are on a tech forum. It's minimally expected you understand that in the context being spoken of, "calculator" is slang for "relatively low performance computing device". Such as a phone or portable media player. It doesn't take a genius to realize that I'm not talking about Grandpa's HP 12C here. If anything, in terms of raw power, I think phones only recently really surpassed what Haswell-S DT (i7-4790K's core) can do. Excluding graphics and memory performance, Geekbench's data places a Core i7-4790K at around the same ballpark of a Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1.

Trend is that hardware always moves faster, faster, and faster. Compare the Core i9-11900K's performance with the i9-13900K's and you'll see what I mean.

 

[Shrek]

10 years is possible, but may not be advisable.

My main machine at home is a Core 2 upgraded to a Quad and still going strong after more than 10 years.

 

[Dr. Dro]

10 years is possible, but may not be advisable.

My main machine at home is a Core 2 upgraded to a Quad and still going strong after more than 10 years.

Thing is who knows the direction things will take in 10 years from now. Earlier generations of CPUs got axed due to security concerns like never before. Point in case ever stopped to read reviews from the late 2000s? Such as reviews for the original Core i7 processor from 2008.

Back then people probably expected us to have working spacetravel and at least a weekly shuttle to Mars by 2024.

 

[Bones]

I'm not going to "Explore" all the why's and why not here or attempt to justify it as to "Why" - I'm just going to say directly what specs for a build I personally believe may last for a decade.

CPU:
Largest cored chip you can get with a decent amount of speed and be sure other things like extra cache (If available by model) is included. I say that because we don't know what will be required tomorrow, so it's smart to get the best you can today and go with it.

RAM:
No way you can have too much for a "Long run" build as different iterations of Winblows itself has shown per each version's specs to operate over time.
XP can run well with just 2GB's, Win 7 prefers 4GB's minimum or it gets fussy about it and Win 10 needs at least 8GB's to really work properly - The requirements of RAM needed will only increase over time and I'd suggest dead minimum 64GB's worth, more if you can get it to account for future OS releases, games that may need more and so on.

It's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

Board:
High(er) end model with plenty of features you can use as in what might look to be overkill today will in fact be useful tomorrow.

GPU:
No contest here - The biggest, baddest unit with the most RAM in it you can find or afford BUT if expecting to upgrade it over time, then get whatever suits you when you do.

Drives:
Disc (Platter) type HDD's are prone to longer life with a tradeoff of performance vs an SDD unit so it's a matter of what you want or need.
I use a SDD for the OS and a platter drive for archiving stuff I don't want to lose because of that. Your own use and expectations however are what to consider, SDD's are fine but can fail without warning vs what a platter drive will do when it's getting ready to snuff it.

I'd (Personally) get at least one of the largest in size/capacity of each and go with it that way but in truth, what you get is your choice but do get as large of a drive you can get anyway regardless of drive type.

PSU:
Basically the same as the GPU except you really want to shoot for quality here, not so much as wattage rating but a decent wattage rating does help.

Adding up or estimating the total expected power draw/demand of the entire system and then adding about 20% to that will give a wattage rating you can use AND give the PSU a good chance to last.
It is NEVER a good idea to have an electrical component running at 100% capacity all the time, esp when you can expect power spikes in wattage demand that can exceed 100% of it's rating to happen. Roughly running at 80% nominal load capacity continuous will give it the headroom needed to handle these load spikes without alot of difficulty and allow the PSU to last longer too.

If expecting to do upgrades later, esp for the GPU then you may want to go even larger - The choice of what to get is yours of course.

Case:
Something roomy enough for good airflow so the components have a good chance of surviving at least for the time you want it too - Micro-sized cases can be too small/cramped with little airflow and possibly let everything slow roast...
You don't want that, esp when you start considering the eventual buildup of dust and so on, cleaning a larger case is also easier to do too. Having a case with filters you can remove and clean out is the way to go here but again, it needs to be large enough air can flow without alot of restriction and you'd want a decent set of case fans in place too.

Personally speaking, my daily is inside of a Tt Core X5 Amazon.com: Thermaltake Core X5 Black E-ATX Stackable Tt LCS Certified Cube Computer Chassis CA-1E8-00M1WN-00 : Everything Else and it all stays nice-n-cool without issues at all.
A case like this or similar is ideal if you have room for it due to all the interior space it has for airflow and so on.

All the rest:
Like a monitor, periphials and so on can vary according to user preference/need so I can't really suggest much there except to get what makes you happy to use.

That's my way of building a 10 year machine if I were to attempt it.

 

[dgianstefani]

11th gen Intel is not the platform to base a 10 year build off. Especially if you haven't even bought the CPU or other parts yet. However if you must run it, get the i7 and put the saved cash into a better PSU and GPU. You're definitely going to want 32 GB of RAM, but that's not an immediate priority.

For someone who desires high graphics settings and RT, you'd also be much better off with a 4070 Ti Super or a 4080 Super than a 7900GRE. If you can't afford either of these the 4070 Super is still better. Since you intend to use the PC for so long, having access to DLSS for performance/DLAA for quality, and hardware accelerated frame generation is a big perk, as you're going to start running out of native rendering power at around the three to four year mark. Both of these tech are significantly superior to FSR upscaling and frame generation, which is not hardware accelerated and has had immersion breaking IQ issues for years at this point. You can look over TPU's game testing reviews to find out more.

I did a analysis on the state of current RT in another thread, which I've quoted here. TLDR, you do not want to go AMD if you want to use RT, or keep your system for ~10 years.

Definitely go for the i7, and a new PSU.

Your system storage is also questionable.

My advice. Start from scratch and run a 13th/14th gen i5 K build with DDR5. 14 cores is a lot better than 8 slower ones, and DDR5 is cheaper in high capacities.

I'd like to point out that TPU tests with Ray Tracing - which means high settings, but not Path Tracing or "Full Ray Tracing" as NVIDIA calls it.

Graphs are pulled from:

Cyberpunk 2077: Phantom Liberty Benchmark Performance Review - 25+ GPUs Tested

The Phantom Liberty expansion brings big improvements to Cyberpunk 2077 and adds an exciting new story line. The game also gets support for DLSS 3.5 and Path Tracing. In our performance review, we're taking a closer look at image quality, VRAM usage, and performance on a wide selection of modern...

www.techpowerup.com

and the latest GPU review

Galax GeForce RTX 4070 Super EX Review

The Galax GeForce RTX 4070 Super EX comes with a small price increase over the NVIDIA MSRP, yet gives you a premium cooler that's much stronger than what's offered on the baseline models. Both temperatures and noise levels are improved over the Founders Edition.

www.techpowerup.com

In this metric the difference between AMD and NVIDIA is even greater than the 31% faster at native 4K ray tracing the RTX 4080 is over the RX 7900XTX (average across tested games in ray tracing - ultra (but not path tracing)).

This is the averaged chart of native Ray Tracing game tests, without frame generation or upscaling.

View attachment 340013

For direct comparison of ray tracing vs path tracing/full ray tracing, here's the normal "ray tracing" native 4K results in a specific game, known for a high quality and intensive ray tracing implementation, that also supports both ray and path tracing.

Here, the RTX 4080 is 57.6% faster than the RX 7900XTX in minimum FPS, and 59.9% faster in average FPS. The 4090 is in another league, with 101.3% faster performance than the RX 7900XTX in minimum FPS, and 117.3% faster in average FPS, more than twice as fast.

View attachment 340011View attachment 340012

Now here's the 4K "path tracing" or "full ray tracing" results, again without upscaling, frame generation or ray reconstruction, all of which add performance.

Here the RTX 4080 is 226.3% faster in min FPS than the RX 7900XTX, and 220.9% faster in average FPS. The RTX 4090 is again, in another class, being 365.7% faster in minimum FPS, and 353.4% faster in average FPS.

View attachment 340014View attachment 340015

The point i'm trying to make here, is that as you increase the load on the ray tracing hardware of these cards, the NVIDIA cards become faster, relatively, to their AMD equivalents. This is important to understand, because some popular games include very lightweight or basic implementations of "ray tracing", such as global illumination only, for example. This skews the data slightly, because the "ray tracing" performance penalty is much smaller, than if the entire game's lighting was ray or path traced, instead of a hybrid design of rasterised lighting and ray/path traced lighting.

Obviously 4K path traced gaming isn't currently viable at native, without using some form of upscaling/tech to improve FPS, or any combination of performance/quality improving tech such as DLSS/DLAA, Frame Generation and Ray Reconstruction. That's not the point here, I'm just trying to make it clear that most current games don't really push the envelope when it comes to "ray tracing" implementations, they're basically just features tacked on for the small percentage of PC's that can actually run RT/PT games with good FPS. It's simply not a developer priority when most gamers have hardware on the level of an RTX 2060, or use consoles. This will change though, as people naturally get faster hardware over time. So I find it interesting to compare what the difference is in actual performance potential between the two vendors, when these cards are actually stressed with intensive ray/path tracing implementations.

Here's what those path tracing/"full ray tracing" numbers look like when combined with some of the performance improving technologies currently available. Ray reconstruction is only available when used with both DLSS and path tracing/"full ray tracing", it doesn't work with standard "ray tracing". This is because it's a new way of denoising that does both the upscaling and the denoising at the same time, rather than as separate steps, improving both quality and performance. Note that while the graph is titled DLSS 3.5 Performance, this is indicating the performance comparison, the actual testing is done with the DLSS "Quality" preset.

NVIDIA DLSS 3.5 Ray Reconstruction Review - Better Than Native

NVIDIA DLSS 3.5 launches today, supporting GeForce 20 and newer. The new algorithm improves the looks ray traced lighting, reflections, shadows and more. In our DLSS 3.5 Ray Reconstruction review we test image quality, but also discovered that VRAM usage actually goes down and performance goes up.

www.techpowerup.com

View attachment 340018

I wanted to write this because I don't think people (especially people who don't own an RTX card, or even those who haven't tried a higher end Ada generation card) really understand the difference in performance between the two vendors, and just how far ahead NVIDIA is.

I think that this comparison, while not perfect, indicates the kind of performance differences people can expect as RT/PT implementations become more involved, rather than the weak smattering of RT effects sprinkled on top of games that we're used to seeing today, so that consoles (which currently use AMD GPUs) can run the game.

With the release of the PS5 Pro and the eventual Xbox Series refresh, the PS5 Pro is rumoured to have significantly faster ray tracing performance, meaning developers will probably start using heavier RT/PT implementations. But I doubt we'll see widespread path tracing until the next generation of consoles are released, e.g. PS6.

As developers start to actually make full use of the new lighting techniques of the latest game engines moving forward, I expect this trend will really start to show the differences in performance more completely, and game performance testing will show numbers skewing closer and closer to what's been shown here. Path traced lighting, e.g. no rasterized lighting at all, is the obvious end game.

Something interesting to note - look at the RTX 4070 Ti compared to the RX 7900XTX, in the "average FPS" chart it's slower for Ray Tracing. In the heavy RT or PT implementation of Cyberpunk: Phantom Liberty, it's much faster.

This is what I'm getting at, most games today don't come close to fully using the ray tracing hardware on current generation cards, so even with "ray tracing" turned on, the FPS is still dictated by classic rasterization performance. This will change, as games use heavier and heavier RT, or full RT/PT implementations.

The quote has a lot of performance info regarding cyberpunk, the game you mentioned you want to play. So you'll probably find that extra relevant.

If you can't afford to do a new build and GPU right now, do the new build, keep using the 970 until RTX 50xx releases later this year, then get the 5070, which will probably be around the performance level of a 4080.

https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/V4CdWt

Here's a build I did recently for a friend. Ignoring the 4060 Ti, that will set you back around £900, and will be a much more solid base for a ten year build than a 11th gen Intel system with questionable storage and PSU.

 

[DaemonForce]

You can have hardware that may by a chance last 10 years.
You cannot always have hardware that supports all software functions in 10 years relevancy with contemporary software \ games.

It's doable just not ideal. There are milestones in technology that have me building and rebuilding by addressing specific components every 5-10 years to where I end up with a copy of the old computer or a bunch of components that lack a circuitboard that glues them all together. It's extremely unusual that I'll dive into a completely new platform like I did with Ryzen 3000 but the difference was telling.

My timeline:
2004 - Build: Pentium 4 3.00E, 2x256MB DDR-500, 80GB (IDE), Radeon 9200LE 128MB
2005 - 300GB sata and 500W PSU added
2007 - 750GB sata and 550W PSU added
2008 - Norco RPC-250 chassis
2009 - Build: Phenom II X4 955, 2x2GB DDR3-1600, 30GB sata SSD, 700W PSU
750W PSU acquired
2x1GB DDR-500 kit, AH3450 512MB card and 460W PSU added to Pentium 4 system
2010 - 2TB sata added to Pentium 4 system
2013 - New mobo, 60GB sata ssd and HD6570 2GB for Phenom II system
2017 - 4TB sata, 2x4GB DDR3-1600 kit added
2018 - RX 580 8GB, FX-8370 upgrade, 2x8GB DDR3-2133 kit, 120GB sata ssd added
Last Koolance chassis 1080cu upgrade
PSU fan replaced
2019 - Build: Ryzen 5 3600, 2x16GB DDR4-3200, 240GB NVMe
AM3+ board replaced
2020 - 2x16GB DDR4-3200 kit added

So after 4-5 years I retired my Pentium 4 to full time rack server duty, built a Phenom II X4 system and used it until the first and second mobo died, was on 4GB ram between 2009-2017 and quite literally the only thing that prompted that upgrade was VR gaming. By the time I got away from a junk 2GB video card that was causing horrific stutters and destabilizing my AM3 CPU, I was 3 months into the struggle of picking up my RX 580 during peak Ethereum mining (READ: 2xMSRP).

Looking at my Ryzen system, 64GB and a 7900XT 20GB should take care of any problems for the next 10 years as game code has stagnated, we're not really in an era of optimized code anymore, AI is finally becoming interesting and increasing power requirements has been a non-issue because I somehow acquired a 750W PSU that doesn't die (or more likely the Pentium 4 didn't get a chance to lunch it). By the time I got onto FX, it was already long in the tooth and people were telling me not to get it and even one brain damaged fox woman trying to convince me to go FX-9000 series, which I'm glad didn't happen.

Am I upset about the Pentium 4? Was junk then and junk today but served its purpose. GPU specs and prices were absurd and I refuse to run it anymore.
Was the Phenom II okay? Absolutely. Drank power like no tomorrow, failed miserably out of early VR experiences but prompted the first same socket upgrade since Socket 7.
Do I regret the FX? No. In fact it's a cherished item without a current purpose but in a few years will be as valuable as the literal eWaste/eMachines server next to me.
Do I regret the Ryzen? A little bit. X570 kicks ass but something about Ryzen feels very different from other CPUs and I'm already staring down an upgrade to a 5800X3D or 5950X. This weird schizm in CPU philosophy will determine how we use our computers for the next several years but it feels like an empty excuse to catch up to max GPU utilization. Would a 5800X3D system last 10+ years? Absolutely. Full confidence there. But if I were to build a completely new system and expect it to last 10+ years, I would probably start on AM5. Haven't looked at anything Intel in a very long time but 10K and 11K series seem fine. If my favorite streamer can get by on a 10900K and 4090, there's still a LOT of cushion between current and previous generation silicon. Whatever appears in the build list over budget or longevity concerns is a non-issue.

 

[phanbuey]

take whatever your budget is, divide it by half and buy 2 computers... you will spend comparatively less money and have faster machines.

 

[Bagerklestyne]

Ok, I'm gonna get persecuted for saying this (potentially)
The intel platform isn't going to get you 10 years (if nothing else you could have hardware failures that result in needing new core components)
If you want to stay intel, wait for next gen and get an entry level motherboard of decent repute, budget kit of 32 gig of DDR5 and something in the xx600 series of cpus. Problem is it doesn't exist yet.
Here's where my AMD shill steps in, get a health b650 motherboard, 7600X, 32 gig of DDR5 and you've got a platform that's going to have a number of years of active support (so potential upgrade paths)
Issue is that none of the hardware you have now is actively being supported. Your choice of intel cpu upgrade is now 3 generations old and likely to get harder to find and more costly to go with it.

Regarding the gpu, waiting until you need a new gpu is always a decent scenario as, there's always price cuts, new hardware etc that will still drop into to any platform without too much hassle.

While the hardware you picked is fair, it's really going to struggle to make the 10 year window unless just play esports titles (which you don't) and if you're on the Ryzen 7000+ platform, you'll likely have a decent last hurrah option with an X3D chip late into the cycle.

It's your money but I think you'll regret trying to make the B560 and 11th carry you

 

[Space Lynx]

10 years is possible, but may not be advisable.

My main machine at home is a Core 2 upgraded to a Quad and still going strong after more than 10 years.

my 7 yr old gtx 1070 laptop still plays dragon age origins maxed out at 100 fps 100hz (my phone can't btw...), so needs are relative to use, and Linux will keep it going even many years after windows 10 stops

/shrug

I still think he should just add two more sticks of 8gb 3200 ram for all 4 slots in use. keep the 10th gen 6 core. and sell the 970 for w.e save up for a 4070 or higher GPU. utilize frame gen in games he wants to play like cyberpunk 2077.

nice and simple.

 

[Hyderz]

my cpu is entering 6 years soon and my gpu is entering 4 years...
i can only think of 3 titles my pc cant max out cyberpunk 2077, witcher 3 with rt and alan wake 2...
i think my cpu should be fine for another 4 years... and the gpu im looking at dropping the settings to medium or low if its really demanding...
for 2025 games onward...

if you want a 10 year pc from 2024... i'd get a 12th gen intel at least or 7000 series amd platform... but you might require upgrades along the way..