The 10 year plan computer

[cvaldes]

AI is the new thing that will have hardware and software main support, from Win11 moment 5/6 or Win12, right ?

There is nothing preventing OP from dual booting different versions of Windows in order to gain AI functionality that older Windows might not support.

But if his "10-year-plan" build hardware doesn't support those newer AI features, he's SOL regardless of what version of Windows he runs.

This isn't specific to PC hardware, we're seeing this in Macs, smartphones, whatever.

Let's face it, in 2034 there will be AI workloads and usage cases that simply won't run on 2024 (or earlier) era hardware. Without a doubt, there will be new PC gaming features in five years that won't run on today's flagship graphics cards

Half of the stuff he wants to stick in his box is already a generation or two behind. He's getting a headstart on obsolescence. In 2034 his "ten-year-plan" PC will actually be more like a 13 year old PC.

 

[Klemc]

AI already has support in Win 10. Only real difference with 11/12 is more integration with the core OS. AI "enhanced" search etc.

ALLRight, but so for the next ten tyears all will be about AI "support", a 9000 AMD ot Intel equivalent should be great to start with.

 

[dgianstefani]

ALLRight, but so for the next ten tyears all will be about AI "support", a 9000 AMD ot Intel equivalent should be great to start with.

Eh, they'd be good for other reasons, sure, but there's not really anything special about the upcoming gen for AI. Yes, they'll have an NPU, but it's primarily designed for low power, efficient tasks, typically for systems without discrete GPUs as mentioned before. The AI capabilities of a xx70 class GPU for instance are at least an order of magnitude faster and more capable. Plus, almost all the AI software is designed for GPUs, and that shows no signs of changing.

 

[LabRat 891]

-Mobo: "Industrial".
Gamer-Enthusiast boards *can* last 5-15years. Industrial boards are *built* to last 10+years.
DFI still exists, and still makes fantastic motherboards (for industrial-embedded use). I use a >10 year old DFI board for my 'router'.

-PSU: Redundant
It's tough to find redundant PSUs for DIY builds. When you do, they're expensive.
However, your design goals would implicate that as a need. (also need to have a spare unit on hand to replace a dud module)
Note: *some* OEM Server-Workstations use mostly-ATX connections internally, and have a sub-PSU that ea. of the redundant modules plugs into.
Perhaps, repurpose some Server Kit?

-Fans: "Server/Industrial" all XXXmm x 38-45mm or contra-rotating blowers (you'll need the static pressure for the filtering)
Noctua offers a Server/Ind. lineup. SanyoDenki/SanAce, etc. would be my 1st choice however.

-(Air) Filtering. You will need a chassis w/ *very* easy to access filters for your intake air.
No matter how good your HVAC is, you'll get dust in the machine. If you want minimal/no maintenance, you'll have to filter the air and vacuum the intake filters periodically.

-CPU cooler.
AIOs are out of the question.
A custom loop with a BEV's coolant pump and some non-standard long-life coolant, might be an option. Most 'run of the mill' pumps will not last 10years in mostly-on operation.
(Perhaps, an 'industry-tier' Aquarium Pump. The kind that would be used for multi-thousand$ fishies)
Personally, I'd just opt for the BIGGEST HSF tower I could manage, and keep the intake-air filtered.

-TIM.
PTM7950 or a Synthetic Graphite/Graphene pad, are pretty much your only options.
Something like a LiquidMetalPad and LM TIM will not be good long-term options IMHO.

-Storage.
Boot: Optane. (905Ps and P1600X are 'affordable')
Apps: SLC or MLC 'Server NVME' (w/ write-thru protection). [RAID 1/5 may be considered]
Bulk: CMR non-He filled HDDs [RAID 5 or better]

-GPU.
Good luck finding any GPU that's built to last and meant for 3D Acceleration.
I've heard reports that modern AMD Pro and nVidia Quadro cards are built to 'about the same quality' as non-Pro.
IMHO, get something OVERKILL and underclock it. The less thermal and electrical stress, the longer it will last (typically)

-OS.
Depending on use either:
a Windows IoT Enterprise LTSC flavor
or
a Linux Distro w/ a 'fresh' LTS branch.

Buy quality parts meant for long-term/heavy duty use.
Keep it cool, keep it clean.
Keep spares on-hand for key (wearing) components, JIC.
it should last.

 

[Desktopstu]

Well lets take a look at some of the components.
The case is very LARGE like my Koolance server tower, which will more than support any standard ATX mobo. No fitment issues there.
The board supports 10th and 11th gen Intel CPUs which is fine. The loadout appears to be:
g4x4 m_2 ?
g4x16
blank
g3x1
g3x1 g3x4 m_2

As you may guess, I am NOT a fan of this design but it may be fine for your use case. You are not going to have a fun time with this if you're trying to do NVMe RAID so it might be best to load your OS from the (s)lower M.2 slot and dump data over to a massive 2TB disk or bigger for the top slot. That is if you're willing to juggle some sata ports. It's not going to be an issue at first because you're not going to have access to PCI-E g4 speeds or the slot will be disabled entirely, I'm not sure how regressive ASRock is with Intel stuff, just that it's usually awful in the dumbest ways. If your intent is a single user system with no server attached/dependent, it's spooky but probably okay. I'm not fond of this weird M.2 E-Key WiFi module thing that became popular some years ago but may prove useful 10 years from now when M.2 to 10GbE SFP becomes a nice cost effective conversion solution. Keep an eye out for those after year 5 because they should drop out of the $$$ range by then.

The only other thing is this is your IO plate:
View attachment 340584

Yeah. :/ Those video outs are pretty much decoration and I suggest a USB header adapter or you're going to have a problem much sooner than later.

The CPU is a 10400F which according to Intel is similar enough to my Ryzen 3600 in that it's 6c/12t, 65W and no video features. Seems to like DDR4-2666 memory which is...Lacking. Obviously has all the virtualization extensions for Hyper-V and Docker as we're already 10+ years down that road but it only supports up to 16 PCI-E lanes, so I'm guessing the rest is chipset bound. What can you do? :/ Either go all in 4x8GB or pick up a 2x16GB kit, you'll thank me later. You don't want to be hunting down old silicon (can we call them that?) a few years down the line when you want to match memory kits.

The only real question left unanswered is your target framerate and display settings. We don't know if you're on a 60Hz panel, some antique CRT or other. Worry about the GPU later but personally I do 1080p144 desktop and 2K90 VR. If your target framerate on desktop is 120/144 at 1080p, what you have now should be fine. If you're going 2K or 4K, you're going to need more GPU and CPU to push those pixels. This might be a lot to think about. 10 years of target 60FPS sounds miserable to me.

I currently have a 4k 60Hz 27" monitor as my main with some 24" something as my secondary. My plan is to get a higher refresh rate monitor, most likely 2K but may consider 1080 instead using the 4k as my secondary if I want to watch 4K movies maybe.

One moptherboard issue I have had is lack of internal USB headers, theres the USB 3 which is fine giving me two front USB3s but only one USB2 header on the board while theres two required for the case. I may look at getting a splitter cable for this.

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.

The pc would be mostly for entertainment - games, video playback and internet access plus work. I dont think 10 years is a bad target here though, just look at cpus from 10 years back, very much still useable today.

Like others have said in various ways... 10 years is too optimistic, you're setting yourself up for a lot of annoyed moments for the coming decade I reckon.

Don't plan this shit out too much. Much like what I'm thinking I read from your OP, you're a cost conscious buyer like myself. Having A plan is nice. But its also good to keep adjusting the plan to reality.

- Demands change. You say you like high end gaming. You're opting for a 7900GRE to last you the next decade. The only conceivable thing on that card that might last 10 years is the VRAM, if it doesn't artifact prior to that. But: in 10 years, you'll likely want much better RT performance. I hate RT's abysmal performance's guts right now, and I have a 7900XT. It just doesn't pay off, and I'm not paying 20% Nv premium to enjoy 4 games with it. But let's be real: this could be big enough not to ignore anymore in even 5 years time.

- You want to run 10 years on a past gen Intel that isn't even the cream of the crop. Why not a 7800X3D? The very least I would do is move to the most recent RAM & platform. On top of that, on AM5 you could slot in another upgrade somewhere down the line, which in the case of a 10 year life expectancy will definitely be an advantage, you could pick up some 2nd hand CPU even.

Aim for the 5 year mark and then see where things are at. Perhaps cut back on the GPU cost a little bit and funnel more to CPU/platform so you can get a very strong gaming CPU that will last 2 GPU upgrades at least. You're gonna thank yourself later.

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!

 

[cvaldes]

The pc would be mostly for entertainment - games, video playback and internet access plus work. I dont think 10 years is a bad target here though, just look at cpus from 10 years back, very much still useable today.

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!

And yet you quote one of the most demanding games, Cyberpunk 2077.

Don't you remember the "Will it run Crysis?" thing? It's a meme now but not when the game debuted.

Let's go back in time. Do you think that i7 2600/2700 and FX 8150 would be able to spit out frames on Cyberpunk 2077? That game launched in 2020 so we've lopped off 4 hours. With a top-tier GPU from 2014?

Let's face it, a good GPU in 2024 can run CP2077. It'll still run CP2077 fine in 2034. But that's if you don't plan on taking up any more games that will be more demanding of computing resources. Is that realistic over a ten year timeframe? Only you can answer that.

But if you said the same thing in 2014 and Cyberpunk 2077 comes out six years later and destroys that 2600...

The more this discussion develops, the more this 10-year-plan PC seems to be doomed. Sure the 10-year-plan PC may play ordinary specced 2034 games, but certainly not any of the most modern and graphically sophisticated ones.

 

[Desktopstu]

Agreed.

Buying entry level is a waste of money IMO. The sheer amount of first time builders who try to skimp where they can, only ending up having to do an entire rebuild when they upgrade, because nothing from the first build is worth carrying over.

The second hand market exists for a reason. xx50 and lower class cards are ewaste for everything except a display output, and cheap motherboards/CPUs barely make sense in the long run. Same goes for PSUs, cooling, cases, etc.

I'd also make the argument that buying an architecture that doesn't fully support the dominant software environment with hardware acceleration is foolish.

E.g. an 8700K is still viable today. An 8100? An 8600K? Not really.


I tried to say this with my earlier post.



People may be "firm" on keeping certain parts, but as responsible enthusiasts, it's our job to tell them when they're wrong. Instead of wasting money on buying parts for a three year old system, sell what you have (a crap SSD, motherboard, PSU and a low end CPU) and start afresh.

Realistically OP has £600 and could probably get £200 for his current parts besides the 970 which is worth almost nothing. That's ~£800 that can go to a new build. If he can suffer using the 970 until RTX 50xx releases, he'll be in a much better position for a long haul build.

PCPartPicker Part List: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/cpr4kJ

CPU: Intel Core i7-14700KF 3.4 GHz 20-Core Processor (£363.66 @ Amazon UK)
CPU Cooler: ID-COOLING SE-224-XTS BLACK 70 CFM CPU Cooler (£26.99 @ Amazon UK)
Motherboard: MSI MAG B760M MORTAR WIFI II Micro ATX LGA1700 Motherboard (£169.99 @ Amazon UK)
Memory: Patriot Viper Venom 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR5-7000 CL32 Memory (£119.99 @ Amazon UK)
Storage: Western Digital Black SN770 2 TB M.2-2280 PCIe 4.0 X4 NVME Solid State Drive (£107.99 @ Ebuyer)
Power Supply: be quiet! Pure Power 12 M 750 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply (£104.99 @ AWD-IT)
Total: £893.61
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2024-03-25 13:57 GMT+0000

Powerful 8+12 core CPU there, 32 GB of fast DDR5. Good storage, good PSU, good motherboard, ATX 3.0 Gold PSU.

I appreciate the advice and sanity would suggest that 10th / 11th is not ideal for my p[lan. However I have to start somewhere and If i went for 12-14th gen then you just know 15th would come out and people would reccomend that instead. I genuinely believe that the cpu wont be the biggest limiter to the long term plan,. its more likley the GPU. ram and storage. I think in 10 years from its launch date of 2021 a 11900 will still be suitable for most day to day use, indeed 10 years from now it probably would be. Time will tell though.

What I need to decide upon is the RAM, the hard drive configuration and most importantly the gpu.

The 3090 released in September of 2020 so you are still half a year from 4 years in terms of the GPU. It's a bit of a different comparison as well. You bought the highest end products available at the time (Your GPU was $1,500 minimum), OP isn't even buying current gen except for his GPU, let alone top end.



As others have pointed out 32GB would be ideal for a 10 year period. We are currently in the slow transition to 32GB as mainstream, which makes sense given how long 16GB reined.



The problem with the 11900k and 11700k is that they are 66.2% 64.8% as fast as the 14900K in games and half performance in applications.

View attachment 340591

A Ryzen 7600 can be had for a lower price and is 21% faster in games. That's very significant. As a plus that means you'd be on AM5, which gives you access to multiple generations of future upgrades.



The 7900 GRE is good value although for a longer term build I'd probably recommend getting the best value card on the market. Specifically the 6800 XT, 6800, 7600, and 6600. The latter two won't last as long while the former two will but have a higher upfront cost. All of those lead their respective brackets value wise. The cost of these cards is approximately half that of the GRE or less for the lower two. You can save the extra money and upgrade again at the same tier in the future. Upgrading from best value to best value is the play.



Anything with a good review that you can find cheap. Used is a good option, just make sure you put whatever you get through it's paces.



The i9 is not worth the extra.



No, samsung drives are overpriced. Pretty much any M.2 drive is going to be indentical performance wise to the average end user. Just get whatever is the best value for the storage space you need. I'd also recommend avoiding QLC based , especially on drives lower than 1TB.



On an Intel platform? No, not with the tier of components you are buying. Intel has low memory latency to begin with.



You should invest in whatever brings you the most value (aka what I listed above). The 3070 is probably one of the worst GPUs you could invest in. 8GB of VRAM was not enough when that card launched, let alone in 10 years.



I'd order them all at once. PC parts typically devalue over time so by having parts sitting around you are likely loosing money and potentially missing out on sales. Things like the pandemic are exceptions to this rule but exceedingly rare (thankfully, I cannot take being couped all that much).

Thank you for actually taking the time to respond to my points rather than just bashing the plan.

 

[dgianstefani]

I appreciate the advice and sanity would suggest that 10th / 11th is not ideal for my p[lan. However I have to start somewhere and If i went for 12-14th gen then you just know 15th would come out and people would reccomend that instead. I genuinely believe that the cpu wont be the biggest limiter to the long term plan,. its more likley the GPU. ram and storage. I think in 10 years from its launch date of 2021 a 11900 will still be suitable for most day to day use, indeed 10 years from now it probably would be. Time will tell though.

What I need to decide upon is the RAM, the hard drive configuration and most importantly the gpu.


Thank you for actually taking the time to respond to my points rather than just bashing the plan.

It's not bashing when we're right. People are taking the time out of their day to give you good advice, which you are choosing to ignore.

Go ahead and build your 11th gen system, but it's not the best use of your money, and just because 15th gen is six months away doesn't mean going with a three year old CPU (that will cost you twice as much as a 12100F, which performs as well in gaming) on a four year old platform, is smart.

 

[cvaldes]

Well from a performance standpoint the graphics card that will look the least creaky in 2034 will be the RTX 4090. It's not like a RX 7900 XTX is going to magically leapfrog the RTX 4090 five years from now.

A year from now the RTX 5080 will probably beat the 4090. And the RTX 6070 in three years will beat the 4090. Five years = 7060. Seven years = 8050. Nine years = whatever integrated graphics in an ultrabook SoC. Eleven years = whatever graphics cores are in your wife's phone SoC.

And all you'll have is a nice fat electricity bill. You'll be killing it on that.

 

[dgianstefani]

Well from a performance standpoint the graphics card that will look the least creaky in 2034 will be the RTX 4090. It's not like a RX 7900 XTX is going to magically leapfrog the RTX 4090 five years from now.

A year from now the RTX 5080 will probably beat the 4090. And the RTX 6070 in three years will beat the 4090.

Hence the suggestion to build a 10 year platform, but upgrade the GPU in ~five years. But he wants to go with a four year old platform from day one, so...

An Ivy Bridge/Devils Canyon i7 3770K/4790K is still perfectly usable today. They don't have the latest and greatest, but are still 8 thread CPUs with decent clocks and good RAM latency.

A Core 2 Quad though? Pretty much useless for gaming.

 

[Desktopstu]

And yet you quote one of the most demanding games, Cyberpunk 2077.

Don't you remember the "Will it run Crysis?" thing? It's a meme now but not when the game debuted.

Let's go back in time. Do you think that i7 2600/2700 and FX 8150 would be able to spit out frames on Cyberpunk 2077? That game launched in 2020 so we've lopped off 4 hours. With a top-tier GPU from 2014?

Let's face it, a good GPU in 2024 can run CP2077. It'll still run CP2077 fine in 2034. But that's if you don't plan on taking up any more games that will be more demanding of computing resources. Is that realistic over a ten year timeframe? Only you can answer that.

But if you said the same thing in 2014 and Cyberpunk 2077 comes out six years later and destroys that 2600...

The more this discussion develops, the more this 10-year-plan PC seems to be doomed. Sure the 10-year-plan PC may play ordinary specced 2034 games, but certainly not any of the most modern and graphically sophisticated ones.

Could a 2600 / 2700 run cyberpunk? Yes it can, or so I understand from a few you tube videos ive seen. Its not ideal but it could do it. If we tried the same with lets say a 13700K cpu and a 2011 vintage graphics card like GTX 580 or HD 6970 apparently it can but its not pretty. If you took an i7 2600 and an HD 6970 together and tried to run cyberpunk i think they would self combust.

CPUs age better than graphics cards i think.

It's not bashing when we're right. People are taking the time out of their day to give you good advice, which you are choosing to ignore.

Go ahead and build your 11th gen system, but it's not the best use of your money, and just because 15th gen is six months away doesn't mean going with a three year old CPU (that will cost you twice as much as a 12100F, which performs as well in gaming) on a four year old platform, is smart.

I stand corrected, its not bashing the plan, but the chap who responded at least responded to the points I asked about.

 

[dgianstefani]

Could a 2600 / 2700 run cyberpunk? Yes it can, or so I understand from a few you tube videos ive seen. Its not ideal but it could do it. If we tried the same with lets say a 13700K cpu and a 2011 vintage graphics card like GTX 580 or HD 6970 apparently it can but its not pretty. If you took an i7 2600 and an HD 6970 together and tried to run cyberpunk i think they would self combust.

CPUs age better than graphics cards i think.


I stand corrected, its not bashing the plan, but the chap who responded at least responded to the points I asked about.

CPUs do age better than GPUs, but you're talking about a 10 year timespan.

Starting off with a four year old platform and a three year old CPU isn't a good way to do that.

You will have to replace the GPU at somepoint during that 10 years if you want to play new games. You will not have to replace the CPU if you don't go with an obsolete one from day one.

 

[Klemc]

Hence the suggestion to build a 10 year platform, but upgrade the GPU in ~five years. But he wants to go with a four year old platform from day one, so...

An Ivy Bridge/Devils Canyon i7 is still perfectly usable today. They don't have the latest and greatest, but are still 8 thread CPUs with decent clocks and good RAM latency.

A Core 2 Quad though? Pretty much useless.

4 years, he want i10700 CPU ? lol.

 

[dgianstefani]

4 years, he want i10700 CPU ? lol.

The socket is four years old. The CPU he's considering (11700/900K) is a three year old CPU based on a revised 14nm process first introduced in 2014.

 

[Klemc]

10700, 11700, but is that not 12700 that proved to be first good gen ? Since 10700 was new socket !

 

[dgianstefani]

10700, 11700, but is that not 12700 that proved to be good gen ?

???

Alder lake is 12700, Raptor Lake is 13700, Raptor Lake refresh (with four extra cores) is 14700.

The generation is the first two numbers.

What is your question here?

10700, 11700, but is that not 12700 that proved to be first good gen ? Since 10700 was new socket !

Yes, Alder Lake was a significant jump in performance, introducing an entirely new architecture, two types of cores, a new process and platform.

 

[cvaldes]

Hence the suggestion to build a 10 year platform, but upgrade the GPU in ~five years. But he wants to go with a four year old platform from day one, so...

Yeah, I don't get it in the context of building a PC.

I have multiple computers under my roof and I have different longevity expectations from all of them. But to start with a four-year old platform and expect 10+ years of service doesn't make sense. My microwave oven and dishwasher? Sure.

I just have in the back of my head that there will be a certain amount of technology related expenses every year. Some years are leaner than others and I have to defer desired purchases. But I have been using computers (and other things like televisions, cellphones, etc.) long enough to have some sort of grasp over expected lifespans.

I've owned 7-year old notebook PCs. A monitor that lasted 13 years. My Mac mini 2018 is going on its sixth year (I also have an M2 Pro Mac mini which is now my primary Mac). My DSL modem-router is probably 8-9 years old. I know what a 10-year old television looks like. I drive a 2005 model year car. I have an electric coffee bean grinder from the Nineties.

But to expect a personal computer primarily used for gaming, including some AAA resource-demanding titles like CP2077 to perform acceptably in 2034 just doesn't seem to fit into my interpretation of reality.

 

[Solaris17]

Ok, I'm gonna get persecuted for saying this (potentially)

I am going to be honest. I stayed way away from this thread because I think like this, but even worse. I actually don't think either will work well for a decade.

If it were me, I would just save my pennies and just throw $$$ at HEDT. Epyc or Xeon workstation. Then upgrade the GPU as able and look back well....in 10 years.

Its fun playing with old machines, and if web browsing is the flavor of the day, then time and time again old machines earn there keep and just keep going. For anything productive or reacreational though I just dont think consumer platforms have the legs.

 

[Klemc]

???

Alder lake is 12700, Raptor Lake is 13700, Raptor Lake refresh (with four extra cores) is 14700.

The generation is the first two numbers.

What is your question here?

Since 10000 was a new socket, 11000 was not a good update, since 12000 only Intel CPU got good again since the socket change.

He should consider efficiency, 10 years with a 350w CPU costs more than upgrade each 3 years.

 

[Desktopstu]

I just want to thank all of you who have responded. I appreciate the advice.

The gist of the advice is, 11th gen for a 10 year plan is a mistake and i can see where you are coming from with that point. The reason I started out with 10th / 11th was this: id built my partner a 10400 based pc around 2021 and its been great, but what I really wanted to do was get her an i7 but at the time I couldnt afford it when they came out. I recently got her an i7 10700 and that meant there was this `spare `10400` and this started me thinking about the proposed 10 year plan. I know its not an ideal solution but I thought it may make an interestingn project to see if I could build a pc from 10 / 11th gen to last 10 years. Its clear from the feedback its not going to work out.

So let me change the rules a little. Lets say I build a 2021 pc to the highest spec I can afford and see if that would last 10 years from 2021, i.e. to 2031 without needing any major upgrades.

If I was to attempt this which graphics card would you reccomend? RTX 3080 based or RX 6900 based?

 

[dgianstefani]

I am going to be honest. I stayed way away from this thread because I think like this, but even worse. I actually don't think either will work well for a decade.

If it were me, I would just save my pennies and just throw $$$ at HEDT. Epyc or Xeon workstation. Then upgrade the GPU as able and look back well....in 10 years.

Its fun playing with old machines, and if web browsing is the flavor of the day, then time and time again old machines earn there keep and just keep going. For anything productive or reacreational though I just dont think consumer platforms have the legs.

I understand the appeal of HEDT, but with Intel, the HEDT cores are actually older than the consumer ones, and for AMD, like Intel HEDT, it's way out of his budget.

A 14700 with 8P12E cores would hold it's own, when paired with fast RAM, in my opinion, and it wouldn't break the bank either.

I just want to thank all of you who have responded. I appreciate the advice.

The gist of the advice is, 11th gen for a 10 year plan is a mistake and i can see where you are coming from with that point. The reason I started out with 10th / 11th was this: id built my partner a 10400 based pc around 2021 and its been great, but what I really wanted to do was get her an i7 but at the time I couldnt afford it when they came out. I recently got her an i7 10700 and that meant there was this `spare `0400` and this started me thinking about the proposed 10 year plan. I know its not an ideal solution but I thought it may make an interestingn project to see if I could build a pc from 10 / 11th gen to last 10 years. Its clear from the feedback its not going to work out.

So let me change the rules a little. Lets say I build a 2021 pc to the highest spec I can afford and see if that would last 10 years from 2021, i.e. to 2031 without needing any major upgrades.

If I was to attempt this which graphics card would you reccomend? RTX 3080 based or RX 6900 based?

Neither, go for a 4070 Super, it's about the same price and performs better, while being much more efficient and supporting newer tech.

If you can afford it, a 4070 Ti Super is almost a 4080, but for £800.

 

[cvaldes]

If it were me, I would just save my pennies and just throw $$$ at HEDT. Epyc or Xeon workstation. Then upgrade the GPU as able and look back well....in 10 years.

I'm the opposite.

I expect my personal computing tech to have a useful lifespan of five years. Anything else is gravy but not expected.

In the case of that 13-year-old monitor, its exceptional longevity actually deterred me from what I really should have done five years earlier: upgrade to a 4K display.

Better use of money: buy some shares in NVDA and in five years, sell one or two and upgrade your GPU. If you're thrift focused, buying the previous generation GPU or maybe the second place card (like a 4080 SUPER versus the 4090) is typically a better value. For sure in recent years, the mid-generation refresh models are a better value than the launch models of a new graphics architecture.

Quite unsurprisingly, PC assets in a corporate setting are typically deprecated 20% every year. That's right: their capital asset value is $0 in five years. I actually think that's pretty accurate.

And everything about HEDT is more expensive: the CPUs, the motherboards, the memory, the PSUs, thermal solutions, whatever. A great hobby if $100 bills are falling out of your wallet, otherwise your company should be paying for this.

 

[Klemc]

I just want to thank all of you who have responded. I appreciate the advice.

The gist of the advice is, 11th gen for a 10 year plan is a mistake and i can see where you are coming from with that point. The reason I started out with 10th / 11th was this: id built my partner a 10400 based pc around 2021 and its been great, but what I really wanted to do was get her an i7 but at the time I couldnt afford it when they came out. I recently got her an i7 10700 and that meant there was this `spare `10400` and this started me thinking about the proposed 10 year plan. I know its not an ideal solution but I thought it may make an interestingn project to see if I could build a pc from 10 / 11th gen to last 10 years. Its clear from the feedback its not going to work out.

So let me change the rules a little. Lets say I build a 2021 pc to the highest spec I can afford and see if that would last 10 years from 2021, i.e. to 2031 without needing any major upgrades.

If I was to attempt this which graphics card would you reccomend? RTX 3080 based or RX 6900 based?

X3D CPU, because it's 120w (max) and not 350w (or even more idk), now cheap too.

Intel CPU need a powerplant for himelf alone, think about it.

 

[dgianstefani]

X3D CPU, because it's 120w (max) and not 350w (or even more idk), now cheap too.

Intel CPU need a powerplant for himelf alone, think about it.

An X3D is the only eight core I'd buy today.

But for a long lifespan the extra cores of Intel are useful, in which case a Raptor Lake i5/i7 makes more sense for similar money.

 

[cvaldes]

X3D CPU, because it's 120w (max) and not 350w (or even more idk), now cheap too.

Intel CPU need a powerplant for himelf alone, think about it.

This is pure silliness in a consumer desktop computing context.

Performance-per-watt is a *BIG* deal in reference to mobile computing, battery powered handheld devices, and enterprise computing.

But for some guy wanting to play World of Tanks, it really doesn't matter if he give the power company a few extra dollars every month unless he's buying old silicon that is exceptionally power inefficient and has the opportunity to get something comparable with far better performance-per-watt.

Heat-related fan noise is more of an issue. If he really was super gung ho about using less electricity, none of the items on his wishlist would be there from the start.

But hey man, they're not my dollars and not my eardrums. He has to live with his purchase decisions.