When is my computer going to be outdated?

chengbin

Distinguished
Apr 5, 2009
77
0
18,640
I bought this rig in early 2008, and I need to think about the future, when should I buy a new computer.

This is my specs of my rig.

Q6600, 3GB RAM, 500GB HDD, 8800GT, Blu-ray burner, 22'' monitor, Creative Xtrememusic sound card, Z-5500

I'm mainly concerned about the CPU, RAM, and video card. When will quad cores be obsolete? How's my video card.

I use my rig mainly for video encoding (16 hours of x264 everyday) . I also use it of course for internet surfing, watching HD videos, and some light gaming (like CoD4/5).

In your opinion, how is this rig right now? (OKish, good, sucks) What are the trends of hardware right now (and in the future).

So far I plan to buy my next computer when USB 3.0, PCI 3.0, at least 8 core CPU are available. I also plan to buy a SSD instead of a HDD for speed and reliability.

I plan to use my next computer for as long as possible. This is not something I normally do (I've upgraded my computer every 3 years before). My main reasons for my plan to do this is because (correct me if I'm wrong)

1) Because I have an SSD, it doesn't slow down to a crawl after a few years like HDDs do. It is also much faster than a HDD.

2) I will have USB 3.0 and PCI 3.0 in my computer, so I'm futureproof for a while

3) By that time, I'll be buying at least a 8 core CPU, probably even more. I'll also buy a lot of RAM, looking to buy 24GB. I don't see how programs can get much more demanding that can make a >8 core CPU sluggish. I don't see how I can use more than 24GB of RAM (I know you want to say people said some of the same thing 10 years ago). I can't use much more than 2GB of RAM unless I run x264 or some games.

I'm curious, how can games get any more demanding? Crysis is very demanding, but the graphics are almost photorealistic. I don't see how use can do much better. CoD 4, nowhere near as demanding, also looks extremely good. When I buy a graphic card on my next computer purchase, it will be far far more powerful than my current 8800GT, and will probably run Crysis Warhead in ultra high resolution with some AA/AF with ease. I don't see how games can get any better and more demanding.
 

B-Unit

Distinguished
Oct 13, 2006
1,837
1
19,810
*Shakes head*

Your PC is fine. Not top of the line by any stretch, but still fine. 8800GT/9800GT/GTS240 is still a decent performer, although you may want to look at an upgrade for it sometime over the next year. Q6600 will be just fine untill your ready to make a jump to your next rig. You may consider a move to 64-bit so you can have some more RAM, but I wouldnt get too worked up about it, 3GB will probably keep up OK.

You didnt mention, but do you/are you interested in overclocking? A few hundred extra Mhz will help stretch you even further.

EDIT: Its not your hard drive that gets slow as the years tick by, its your Windows installation. I personally never go longer than 9-12 months on an install of Windows, it just gets too bogged down.
 

chengbin

Distinguished
Apr 5, 2009
77
0
18,640
I can't overclock unforunately (except my video card). I have a Dell XPS 420, and Dell does not allow you to overclock through BIOS.

To B-Unit, I realize that. Even after a reinstallation through ghost, it is still not as responsive as when I first bought it.

I knew when I bought a P4 4 years ago it was pretty damn outdated after a year. It simply couldn't keep up, and it was painful to use.
 

mildiner86

Distinguished
Nov 30, 2008
274
0
18,790
it is a rather odd question what u have asked.

1. ive generally found normal hard drives dont slow down much over time, its the OS which gets sluggish a format and fresh install normally helps that. dont see how an SSD will make a huge differnce

2. u can never expect a system to last for more than around 2-3 years with out an upgrade it u want it to be considered "good"

3.ur system is ok, for day to day internet stuff that spec will be fine for another 4-5years though for top end gaming it will all ready be sluggish

4. games will always get better, i remeber seeing quake 2 and thinking how can games get any better then seeing doom 3 and thinking how can games get any better, then seeing crysis and guess what how can games get n e better.

they just get more realistic

there is never a point in time when theres not another future development round the corner.

a few months ago it was corei7 before that DDR3 and SSD's which still aint perfect

it will be USB 3 PCIe 3.0 ect but there will always be new things.

i just buy a sstem with a good motherbaord and upgrade parts when i need to
 

tecmo34

Administrator
Moderator
+1 to jaguarskx & gkay09....

And than there are people that upgrade to whatever the new technology is, even when their current system can destroy whatever is out there now. Your decision to upgrade is solely based on when YOU feel your computer is no longer meeting your expectations on performance. Everyone has his or her own opinion on what is current and what is obsolete in the computer world. If your system works for you, than it isn't obsolete and doesn't require updating.
 

loneninja

Distinguished


Well according to some book I just read a red dwarf star passes through our solar system every few thousand years and nearly destroys all life on earth, book brought together a lot of useful information and interesting facts, but I still doubt it'll happen.

To OP, your system is basically out dated when ever you decide it isn't fast enough for you, or it literally cannot run/is not compatible with new operating systems, new software that you need to use, ect. I know people who are still running computers nearly 10 years old, they work fine for basic office and internet tasks but they are really slow compared to anything even remotely modern.
 

chengbin

Distinguished
Apr 5, 2009
77
0
18,640
Well, this PC right now is kind of strange. It fits my needs perfectly in one way, and in the other way (when I'm doing video encoding), it is terribly slow.
 
Video encoding is just one of those things that uses up alot of resources. If you have alot of background services running that won't help. It may be time for you to format your computer and do a clean install and that should speed it up a bit. If video encoding is your main thing then you may want to think about upgrading to an i7 system. You will need a new case (unless you can use your dell case), motherboard, CPU, and RAM, but you will be able to use your current video card, HD, Optical Drives, and maybe your PSU. Personally I'll send video encoding stuff to my old Athlon computer (encoding flash vids or whatever) to free up my main system for work or playing games that way I'm not twiddling my thumbs while the video encodes ^_^.
 

lucuis

Distinguished
Apr 21, 2008
1,048
0
19,310



I'm pretty sure your 8800gt supports CUDA enhanced Video Encoding. Check out the nvidia website. Should increased your encoding speeds by a lot.

I think this may be what you're looking for.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/cuda_home.html#state=detailsOpen;aid=7E3FAFC6-B7D0-11DD-A2A0-A58455D89593

TMPGEnc 4.0 XPress video encoder may also be what you're looking for. Either way search for Video Encoding Software that can use CUDA to speed it up. A lot of the time it can increase speeds by 4x. GL
 

Axeon

Distinguished
Apr 2, 2009
253
0
18,780
Its still good as long as you think it is, i'm still using a Pentium 4 like Gkay09 said with only 2.4Ghz on it it good for my needs though.
 

PinkishBruno

Distinguished
Mar 3, 2008
31
0
18,530
Personally, unless games start coming out with multi-core support, I'd stick with my dual-core. If you're not doing anything special like encoding video, bouncing audio tracks... I'd stick with the dual-core sweetspot.

Also, as you start to parallelize data more you'll start bottlenecking your memory, meaning that you're going to have to think about DDR3.

I'd also do the same with RAM; there's a point where performance just won't increase unless you like opening multiple instances of Crysis.

In order of regularity of replacement (IMO and from a gamer's perspective):

1) Graphics card
2) CPU
3) Motherboard
4) Memory interface (e.g DDR3)

I've left out things like sound cards and HDDs because intensity of use varies very much along different people.
 

sanchz

Distinguished
Mar 2, 2009
272
0
18,810
I've upgraded last year form an old 1.2 GHz Athlon XP Geforce 6800 XE system to an Athlon X2 2.7 GHz GeForce 8600 GT and got a very nice speedup.
It suits my needs perfectly as any game is playable at 1024 X 768 (CRT Monitor) on high settings (medium Crysis and medium-low GTA 4).
I do a bit of encoding and I don't care if it isn't super fast.
I don't see the point in going quad since the only game which benefits from it is GTA 4. I won't upgrade my video card because I would have to spend more on a new power supply.
So, I think of my system as a good and fast one, and I will only upgrade if new games need a faster PC, or I begin to feel it is slow.
 

chengbin

Distinguished
Apr 5, 2009
77
0
18,640
I guess next time you wont buy a Dell huh? If you could overclock, your pc would be fine for another year or two with a graphics upgrade. However, at 2.4ghz, your really gonna bottleneck a good video card.
Maybe sell you Dell system and get a nice i7 system?

I will. I'm sticking with Dell. Dell allows me to customize the PC. Also, and the most important thing, they have the lowest prices. Their quality is quite excellent too. Customer support is fantastic, it is not some Indian guy on the phone. They will take care of your problem quickly. (they offered to replace my PC because I accidentally screwed up when I reinstalled Vista to get rid of the junk that came with the computer)

I know you'll tell me to DIY, and build my own rig. I don't see that saves much money. Yes, the components are cheaper, but if you factor in the $200 Windows Vista, the deal doesn't look so hot anymore. I didn't even mention putting them together, takes lots of time, and what if you screw up?



Thanks, but I've tried them for fun before. The quality is terrible. I don't care about encoding time, I care about quality. I'm an avid x264 user.

I don't plan to upgrade parts for my PC, I rather buy a new one.

Yes, the i7 is sweet, even the 920. It can speed up my encodings by 40-50% (!) because of hyperthreading and other CPU capabilities, but that would be a waste of my Q6600, considering it is still a pretty good processor.
 

daship

Distinguished
You could get rid of the slow HDD drive Dell uses, try HDtune on it I bet it benches 50-60MBs which is slow.

Throw a couple SSDs in raid, and you will see a huge difference how windows runs. If you encode alot then your PC is real outdated compared to i7. My i7 can convert a 800mb .avi to DvD in 13 minutes, encodeing and burning. Try that with a q6600.


"Dec 21, 2012 Remark"
For all of mankind, the earth has been in the top 1/2 of the Milkyway Galaxy, and on the above mentioned date the earth will pass through to the equater of the galaxy. What will this do you ask? The earths gravitional poles will switch instantly causing major catastrophys, Like eathquakes and world wide Sunamis. Millions will die.
 

chengbin

Distinguished
Apr 5, 2009
77
0
18,640


I know, x264 released optimizations for i7 CPU the second they came out. It is about 40% faster then a Penryn in the same clock speed. It takes about 10 hours to encode 2 movies (using multiple insanely slow settings, like MVDegrain 3, and I'm running 2 encoding at once).

SSDs, that's when I get my new computer. They're WAYYYYY too expensive now. That's why I'm gonna get SSD on my next purchase.

My HDD gets about 70MB/s on HDTunes.
 

daship

Distinguished
70MB is still slow. A Western Digital 640 avgs around 110MB/s.

My raid 0 SSDs get 507MB/s. I have 4 ozc core v2s 30G each. I'm actuallt gonna sell them for $60 a piece on Ebay real soon, because I want to grab some of of new Vertex ones.