I'm on the verge of buying a new pc but it's not fully complete yet. Do you guys think it is better to buy the best products and upgrade less frequently or buy good but not the best technology and upgrade more frequently? Which is more cost and performance efficient. In these terms of best, I'm talking about a i5 2500k and for good, a i3 2100. Obviously everyone wants to save money so I don't want to waste money on something that I won't fully utilize. Thanks for the inputs.
I'd buy the latest technology I could afford. That doesn't mean it has to be the most expensive. We know the Intel 1055 MB will accept an Ivy Bridge CPU when they become available and that AMD just introduce 2 'smokin' hot' GPU's with Nvidia ready to release some new graphics in the coming months. AMD is no longer CPU competitive with Intel and appears they have no future plans to be that way in the gamers' market.
If you get 3 or 4 years out of a new computer that's about all you can expect. The latest and greatest is always on the drawing boards.
A good CPU like the 2500K will last you a few generations, since few games today are CPU-limited. Most games now are GPU dependent, so upgrading you GPU every year or two will give you a more noticeable benefit.
It also depends on how up-to-date you want to be. There are guys still running Core 2 Quads and GTX 280s because they'll max out all DX10 settings @ 1920x1080. Since DX11 is phasing in, you'll most likely want those features, but you may not necessarily want to spend the $$$ when DX12 starts to come 'round.