The 10 year plan computer

[A Computer Guy]

am4 5950xt is coming

Wait, What, Really?

 

[johnspack]

Nothing in computers can stay relevant for 10 years. Not possible. Look at my relic from 2020-2021. It's done, but I keep using it because I'm too poor to upgrade.
Good luck!

 

[AMF]

Wait, What, Really?

AMD's Ryzen 5000 CPU Refresh May Be Closer Than We Think

XT treatment all over again?

www.tomshardware.com

 

[tussinman]

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.

Agreed. 10 years from launch might do doable. CPU (with adequate ram and good GPU) should be fast enough to cover the rest of the PS5/Series X gen which I'm assuming they'll make games for both till 2030 (with a year or 2 period where they make games for both new gen and old gen). 10 years from present day like you said is completely different ball game.

 

[Devon68]

Any Pc can be a 10 year pc if you dont upgrade

 

[Desktopstu]

Nothing in computers can stay relevant for 10 years. Not possible. Look at my relic from 2020-2021. It's done, but I keep using it because I'm too poor to upgrade.
Good luck!

Why do you say your 10yr old pc is done? Just looked at the spec and its still useable today which is the point ive been trying to make.

 

[dgianstefani]

Why do you say your 10yr old pc is done? Just looked at the spec and its still useable today which is the point ive been trying to make.

An iPhone 3G is still *usable* today.

Doesn't mean you should rush out and buy an iPhone X then use it for the next six years.

You can make as many points as you want about how usable 11th gen is, but it still doesn't mean spending hundreds of pounds building a system based off of it in 2024 is logical.

 

[AusWolf]

Why do you say your 10yr old pc is done? Just looked at the spec and its still useable today which is the point ive been trying to make.

Sure, you can build a PC for stupid amounts of money and use it for 10 years, but you're much better off building one that lasts only half as long for much less money, and upgrading it later. It isn't only much cheaper, but also keeps you up to date with modern technologies and performance-per-watt figures, which a then 10 year-old PC won't.

 

[Desktopstu]

Agreed. 10 years from launch might do doable. CPU (with adequate ram and good GPU) should be fast enough to cover the rest of the PS5/Series X gen which I'm assuming they'll make games for both till 2030 (with a year or 2 period where they make games for both new gen and old gen). 10 years from present day like you said is completely different ball game.

Ive reset the start clock to 2021 so my plan is to build a powerful 2021 pc and see how it fares through to 2031. I will be updating / ressurecting this thread then to give feedback on how its fared - if it even survives that long.

 

[dgianstefani]

Ive reset the start clock to 2021 so my plan is to build a powerful 2021 pc and see how it fares through to 2031. I will be updating / ressurecting this thread then to give feedback on how its fared - if it even survives that long.

That this makes sense to you is concerning.

 

[Desktopstu]

That this makes sense to you is concerning.

I like that reply.

This isnt a serious plan, its just something ive wanted to do a while. Ive got 7 computers in the house for various uses, ive been building and upgrading pcs since socket A days, im no expert but I do know a fair bit about pcs and how technology advances. To my mind there was a huge leap from single core to dual, if i tried this plan with a late model single core it would have 100% failed. The next big leap in my opinion was dual to quad. Again, had I tried this with an intel E series 775 cpu id have likely failed. Now we have moved from quad to 6 / 8 cores being the norm but a quad core such a Sandybridge would likely still have lasted around 10 years, the steep incline in cpus has, i feel become a more gentle curve and cpus will now last longer than before - or so i believe.

Graphics cards have artificially been on a steep curve however. I dont believe that has to be the case, its just the way things have been forced upon us by manufacturers and games designers. Games suffer with poor optimisation because there is no benefit in optimising them unlike on consoles where your hardware is locked.

Im not ignoring your advice, but many of you are missing the point. I know 11th gen isnt as powerful or efficient as newer sockets. I know AMD would likely be the most cost effective solution - i am far more of a Ryzen fan than an Intel fan. in fact most of my builds are AM4 that I build for people who wish to game on a budget . This build is more of a pet project for me. I want to see how well a pc from a set date can last over a ten year period with little or no upgrading. I cannot afford to do this with the latest AM5 or 14th gen set up so, having been given the first piece of the puzzle (10400) for `free` I felt this would be a reasonable starting point.

 

[DaemonForce]

For a workstation I went from:
1c/1t Pentium 233MHz
1c/1t K6-2 400MHz
1c/2t Pentium 4 3.00GHz
4c/4t Phenom II X4 3.2GHz
8c/8t FX-8370
6c/12t R5 3600 4.0GHz

Anything that isn't current, I retire them to the role of server until issues are ironed out. I somehow dropped everything to make 24/7 use of a cute 2009 era Athlon 64 1c/1t 1.6GHz and that's riding the line. You can do whatever makes sense for gaming and production but keep in mind, most of us typically choose what we want based on power and price, not the age of the product or socket. The fact that I was able to stay on the same configuration for 9 years was a miracle. Someone else in here has had an experience like that too so we're probably the only ones that know straight up you're semi-serious about this topic.

 

[AMF]

Sure, you can build a PC for stupid amounts of money and use it for 10 years, but you're much better off building one that lasts only half as long for much less money, and upgrading it later. It isn't only much cheaper, but also keeps you up to date with modern technologies and performance-per-watt figures, which a then 10 year-old PC won't.

not really how much inflation is there gonna be in 5 years ull save $$ buy doing a 10 year build its cheaper now

 

[AusWolf]

not really how much inflation is there gonna be in 5 years ull save $$ buy doing a 10 year build

You can only guess what inflation is gonna be like in the next 5-10 years, but I can guarantee that the value of a high-end system is gonna drop way more sharply than that of a mid-range one that you're planning to upgrade, not to mention the extra cash saved by not going overboard with the initial specs.

I like that reply.

This isnt a serious plan, its just something ive wanted to do a while. Ive got 7 computers in the house for various uses, ive been building and upgrading pcs since socket A days, im no expert but I do know a fair bit about pcs and how technology advances. To my mind there was a huge leap from single core to dual, if i tried this plan with a late model single core it would have 100% failed. The next big leap in my opinion was dual to quad. Again, had I tried this with an intel E series 775 cpu id have likely failed. Now we have moved from quad to 6 / 8 cores being the norm but a quad core such a Sandybridge would likely still have lasted around 10 years, the steep incline in cpus has, i feel become a more gentle curve and cpus will now last longer than before - or so i believe.

Graphics cards have artificially been on a steep curve however. I dont believe that has to be the case, its just the way things have been forced upon us by manufacturers and games designers. Games suffer with poor optimisation because there is no benefit in optimising them unlike on consoles where your hardware is locked.

Im not ignoring your advice, but many of you are missing the point. I know 11th gen isnt as powerful or efficient as newer sockets. I know AMD would likely be the most cost effective solution - i am far more of a Ryzen fan than an Intel fan. in fact most of my builds are AM4 that I build for people who wish to game on a budget . This build is more of a pet project for me. I want to see how well a pc from a set date can last over a ten year period with little or no upgrading. I cannot afford to do this with the latest AM5 or 14th gen set up so, having been given the first piece of the puzzle (10400) for `free` I felt this would be a reasonable starting point.

As long as it's only for the science with no serious intentions related to everyday usage, go for it, I guess.

 

[AMF]

You can only guess what inflation is gonna be like in the next 5-10 years, but I can guarantee that the value of a high-end system is gonna drop way more sharply than that of a mid-range one that you're planning to upgrade, not to mention the extra cash saved by not going overboard with the initial specs.


As long as it's only for the science with no serious intentions related to everyday usage, go for it, I guess.

ur assuming goingvto the trouble to part it out

nothing like building a pc and ur very unhappy with it if unhappy now who will want it 5 years from now

 

[#22]

I think that your 10-year plan @Desktopstu is just bad to the bone. You try to mix extremely high expectations with wanting to spend as little as possible. The same as people buying mid-range GPU to max out games and after two years, surprise! It lacks performance or VRAM. Maybe they should have bought higher-end model? Wasn't it obvious? Or it lacks some feature brought by new generation. You just want achieve unpredictable using two things going opposite direction and it looks like you came thinking that here some elderly pc sorcerers share secret knowledge of building everlasting computers. I myself gave you short answer on page 2 having it all: secret knowledge; explanation why it sucks and even supported all with sensible examples.

10 years from gaming computer may be doable, but only with assuming that game requirements will progress similarly fast to the past and given hardware won't get obsolete from technological standpoint. But generally such expectations are strange due to needing to buy today at least higher-end hardware, so maxing out settings with high fps and with the pass of time lowering expectations to end up playing lowest settings with barely playable fps. E.g. ten years GTX 980 started strong and today is exact minimum of what you need in most new games for 30fps/1080p/lowest settings and sometimes won't cut it due to 4GB of VRAM. One generation older Kepler cards aged way poorer due to lack of proper DX12 support. Ten years old CPUs are still playable, but rather ones bigger than four cores, so then premium and enthusiast, and only if you don't mind them sentencing your framerate to ~40fps in heavier games and are not smoothness snob.

To give gaming pc highest chances to fulfill this ten-years-plan you want CPU with possibly high single and multicore perfromance, GPU with the biggest VRAM possible and assume that expanding RAM down the road may be needed. Supporting newer standards like e.g. PCIe 5.0 may also come in handy.

Building pc should be about buying parts you're eager to buy without any expectations other than performance they offer today

 

[Klemc]

Low end hardware based on an x3d base, to keep all money as possible in your pocket, wait 10 years & see.

 

[SL2]

Intel's site says it's Raptor?

That's what makes it a rebrand

am4 5950xt is coming

Yeah, those extra <200 MHz will change EVERYTHING /s

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

As many have said, this is a fundamentally stupid ask. Spend nothing, and get a platform that is going to be relevant in a decade.

Let me offer some advice...based on logic.
3930k - new platform at the end of 2011.
2021. The $200 CPU of choice is 6 core 12 thread...the interconnect is two or more generations behind...the performance per watt is actually pretty much a joke...and the midrange to high GPU that I purchased a decade ago is performing worse than a modern low range card. That was my $1000+ spend in 2011...In 2021 I moved to AM4, spend about $400, and got a night and day performance boost. This was without a real GPU upgrade.


A decade is more than you think...and your budget is restricting you to low to middle tier hardware. You have literally no chance to have relevant hardware in 6 years, let alone 10, and you want us to recommend how to do it? I...this is just not reasonable. Let me end with some fun. What would this looked like in 2014?
i7 5820k
GT 970
I...wouldn't wish that on anyone anymore. The 5820 is outclassed by literally low-middle tier stuff...and the 970 is so far past its prime it's not funny. Today people are buying up 2080ti cards for being good value for cost...and that's two generations newer. I...don't think you understand how impossible this ask is...and why if you're on a budget every 4-6 years purchasing a middle tier upgrade is so much more stable of an option... Please, learn from the mistakes of others and don't try for the decade build...or if you do be prepared to only buy the highest of high end hardware to have some relevance. At which point it's an exercise in amortization...and being OK with constantly degrading performance.



If you don't want to listen, then I'll ask you a simple final question. Do you play games? Can you be happy with not playing anything newer than 4-6 years old? I ask because Cyberpunk and others basically won't be playable on some excellent late 2010's rigs...and that's well within a decade. If you're fine with that, then have fun. If not the 4-6 year refresh cycle is pretty stable.

 

[Vayra86]

I dont think the cpu will be the issue in 10 years, I think the graphics card will be the bigger problem. Lets say I went for the i9 11900 which came out in 2021. If we back tracked 10 years the CPU would be an i7 2600/2700 or an AMD FX 8150. Both CPUs debateably useable today. The graphics card however from 2011 would be something like a HD6970 or a GTX 580, neither of which would carry much currency today. Its clear to me that CPUs age better than graphics cards!

You're making a paradoxical argument here.

If you're going to regularly upgrade a GPU because its 'aged' then it will be a faster GPU. And with every GPU upgrade, you're going to increase the chances of having a CPU bottleneck on the same CPU/platform. That especially applies to any platform still on DDR4, which really is on the way out rather than being recent.

An FX or a 2700 isn't 'debatably usable today'. It just simply won't play games proper, you'll be looking at sub 30 FPS more often than not regardless of graphics. I remember already being heavily 'necked with an Ivy Bridge 3570k in World of Warcraft prior to its engine revamp. Moving to a 8700K from there gave me +50% FPS uplift in Total War Warhammer 2, especially in the minimums and in WoW I gained more than that, and lost all stuttering. On the same (GTX 1080) GPU. Go figure.

The argument underneath what you're saying is sound though: yes, you want a 'balanced' system. Pairing super CPU with a shit GPU isn't going to pay off. But this is where planning and upgrade paths come in: can your platform of choice actually carry a GPU upgrade going forward? To what extent is the CPU of choice overkill then? Do you play CPU heavy titles/genres? Those questions are the ones to ask to direct you to the right CPU/platform today.

 

[AusWolf]

ur assuming goingvto the trouble to part it out

nothing like building a pc and ur very unhappy with it if unhappy now who will want it 5 years from now

Who said you had to build a system that you're unhappy with? All I said is that planning for 10 years is a bad idea, in performance, features and value (depreciation) alike.

 

[Vayra86]

Why do you say your 10yr old pc is done? Just looked at the spec and its still useable today which is the point ive been trying to make.

If the topic goal here is to make your point... Okay. Yes, you can keep hardware usable for 10 years. Don't ask how and with what compromises, but sure. You can.

And now? Does this make your plans and upgrade paths any clearer?

 

[Desktopstu]

If the topic goal here is to make your point... Okay. Yes, you can keep hardware usable for 10 years. Don't ask how and with what compromises, but sure. You can.

And now? Does this make your plans and upgrade paths any clearer?

Yes, it has. There’s been a lot of negativity over the plan, I should have expected that I guess.
the advice has been in general to stop what I’m doing, build a reasonable pc with modern parts and just upgrade as and when like most sane people would do. That’s what I’ve been doing for the last 20 years or so.

i will likely still go that for the many other PCs in the house but for this one I want to see just how long I can use it (aiming for 10 years but we will see) and still be reasonably happy with it. I’m likely to have other PCs here more modern but if I can, I want to try keep using this one for as long as I can. See if I can make 10 years.

advice I’ve taken on board:

Aim for 11700 rather than 11900.
Aim for 32gb DDR4 3200 instead of 16
Aim for gen 4 m.2 but doesn’t have to be Samsung
Aim for better quality PSU

Graphics card wise I’m aiming for a 2021(ish) card as powerful as I can realistically afford. So likely RTX3080 series or RX6900 series. Of the two I’m thinking the AMD card will likely be better for long term use with its increased VRAM.

 

[AMF]

see my specs built in 2020 2028-2030 may build new one keep in mind i used existing tv and psu im aiming for 15 - 20 years use outa this psu

 

[Easy Rhino]

You guys are all crazy. All he needs is a dumb terminal. Everyone knows game streaming is the future!