LavitzSlambert
Member
i5-750 to i7-4790k that I’m still running today. Due for an upgrade to an 8 or 16 core X3D chip that will probably last another decade.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
linkroi
Member
Pretty much the same. 5 years Gpu, 10 years completely new system.
Trogdor1123
Member
2500k to a 5800x3d this year. I didn’t game on pc for years though. I won’t change for years though. Probably 6 or 7.
Sunkrest
Member
I don't. I had 2600k for over 10 years before I decided to get a new PC with 7900x3d exactly year ago. Completely skipped DDR4 era and the funny thing is - I did it only because Elden Ring framerate was horrible. I was actually satisfied with sandy bridge when it comes to indies and most pre UE5 engine games.
Given how much I despise modern games, I will probably quit gaming before buying a new CPU
Given how much I despise modern games, I will probably quit gaming before buying a new CPU
Aesius
Member
I have a 7700k and a 3080. I game at 3440x1440 or 4K on my TV. I’m sure the 7700k bottlenecks me a bit but I don’t really care. At high res it seems like my GPU is still the limiting factor on most games. Would be different if I needed 200 fps at 1080p though.
Corporal.Hicks
Member
1999 - Intel Celeron 400MHz + TNT2m64
My first PC wasnt the best, but it was decent compared to my friends' PCs that still had intel graphics cards, riva 128 or Voodoo1 (or no 3D accelerator at all). I OCe'd CPU to 533MHz, and TNT2m64 (this card was bandwidth starved, so when I OC'd memory I saw a MASSIVE 30-40% performance), so my riva was almoast as fast as standard TNT2. I was able to run all games in 1024x768x16 at 30fps, or at 800x600x32 and back then it was extremely impressive, because my friends were still gaming in 640x480x16 or even 320x240 (the ones without 3D accelerator) at 20-30fps (so not even smooth 30fps). In 2000 I upgraded my riva TNT2m64 to Geforce 2 MX 32MB (128bit) because I wanted better performance in Quake 3 at 32Bit color.
2002 - AMD Athlon 1200MHz + geforce 3 128MB
My first PC had only 3 years, but this upgrade has been absolutely massive, my fps in quake 3 went from 7fps on the TNT2M64 (20fps geforce 2MX) in 1600x1200x32 to around 80-100fps. I also bought a PS2 and Xbox in 2003 and have been playing on consoles as well.
2007 - Intel C2Q6600 2.4GHz + Geforce 8800Ultra
This PC was insanely fast in 2007. I could run most games in 1680x1050x32 at over 60fps. Even crysis 1 run fairly good with maxed out settings, atlhough at 30fps (back then it was good enough). I also bought X360 and PS3 the same year, but multiplatform games looked and ran so much better on my PC that I did not play on consoles nearly as much as before.
2012 - Intel Core i5 3570K + GTX 680
DX11 graphics effects (tesselation) were nice and I could finally max out crysis 1 at 60fps. My GTX680 was quite fast back then, but when the PS4 console came out, it became VRAM limited in a lot of PS4 ports. This GPU made me realise that you should never buy a GPU just before a new generation of consoles is released because it will soon be VRAM limited.
2016 - Intel Core i7 3770K (a cheap but very good upgrade on the same platform). I also bought GTX1080 8GB in 2016, and GTX1080ti 11GB in 2017. My VRAM worries were finally over
2024 - AMD 7800X3D + RTX4080S 16GB
CPU upgrade was massive, my fps in shadow of the tomb raider went from 55-70fps to over 300fps. The performance of the RTX4080S also far exceeded my expectations, because I wasnt expecting to run RT games in 4K native at 60fps, yet alone 120-170fps (resident evil 3 remake, or village). The AI features (DLSS and FG) also work well, thanks to them I can run 99% of my games at 4K like image quality at 120fps.
I'm not a fan of the incremental upgrades. I only upgrade when I really see that my PC is struggling to run games at high settings (or console like settings) at playble performance (50/60fps on VRR display is good enough, especially on gamepad). Games are often extremely demanding with maxed out settings / Ultra high settings etc., but if you tweak the settings a little bit you arnt loosing much (something I cant even tell the difference between ultra high and high), yet performance improves drastically. PC gamers who are unwilling to tweak a few settings will probably need to upgrade every year or two, because there will be always a game that will murder even high end PC's with maxed out settings, so if you arnt willing to compriomise you have to change PC parts very frequenlty. IMO people who upgrade so often do so to impress other people rather than for their own needs. I could upgrade my PC more often if I would care what other people think.
My first PC wasnt the best, but it was decent compared to my friends' PCs that still had intel graphics cards, riva 128 or Voodoo1 (or no 3D accelerator at all). I OCe'd CPU to 533MHz, and TNT2m64 (this card was bandwidth starved, so when I OC'd memory I saw a MASSIVE 30-40% performance), so my riva was almoast as fast as standard TNT2. I was able to run all games in 1024x768x16 at 30fps, or at 800x600x32 and back then it was extremely impressive, because my friends were still gaming in 640x480x16 or even 320x240 (the ones without 3D accelerator) at 20-30fps (so not even smooth 30fps). In 2000 I upgraded my riva TNT2m64 to Geforce 2 MX 32MB (128bit) because I wanted better performance in Quake 3 at 32Bit color.
2002 - AMD Athlon 1200MHz + geforce 3 128MB
My first PC had only 3 years, but this upgrade has been absolutely massive, my fps in quake 3 went from 7fps on the TNT2M64 (20fps geforce 2MX) in 1600x1200x32 to around 80-100fps. I also bought a PS2 and Xbox in 2003 and have been playing on consoles as well.
2007 - Intel C2Q6600 2.4GHz + Geforce 8800Ultra
This PC was insanely fast in 2007. I could run most games in 1680x1050x32 at over 60fps. Even crysis 1 run fairly good with maxed out settings, atlhough at 30fps (back then it was good enough). I also bought X360 and PS3 the same year, but multiplatform games looked and ran so much better on my PC that I did not play on consoles nearly as much as before.
2012 - Intel Core i5 3570K + GTX 680
DX11 graphics effects (tesselation) were nice and I could finally max out crysis 1 at 60fps. My GTX680 was quite fast back then, but when the PS4 console came out, it became VRAM limited in a lot of PS4 ports. This GPU made me realise that you should never buy a GPU just before a new generation of consoles is released because it will soon be VRAM limited.
2016 - Intel Core i7 3770K (a cheap but very good upgrade on the same platform). I also bought GTX1080 8GB in 2016, and GTX1080ti 11GB in 2017. My VRAM worries were finally over
2024 - AMD 7800X3D + RTX4080S 16GB
CPU upgrade was massive, my fps in shadow of the tomb raider went from 55-70fps to over 300fps. The performance of the RTX4080S also far exceeded my expectations, because I wasnt expecting to run RT games in 4K native at 60fps, yet alone 120-170fps (resident evil 3 remake, or village). The AI features (DLSS and FG) also work well, thanks to them I can run 99% of my games at 4K like image quality at 120fps.
I'm not a fan of the incremental upgrades. I only upgrade when I really see that my PC is struggling to run games at high settings (or console like settings) at playble performance (50/60fps on VRR display is good enough, especially on gamepad). Games are often extremely demanding with maxed out settings / Ultra high settings etc., but if you tweak the settings a little bit you arnt loosing much (something I cant even tell the difference between ultra high and high), yet performance improves drastically. PC gamers who are unwilling to tweak a few settings will probably need to upgrade every year or two, because there will be always a game that will murder even high end PC's with maxed out settings, so if you arnt willing to compriomise you have to change PC parts very frequenlty. IMO people who upgrade so often do so to impress other people rather than for their own needs. I could upgrade my PC more often if I would care what other people think.
Last edited:
EDMIX
Writes a lot, says very little
This, like 90% of the time. Even with having a heavy workload, CPU is a one and done for me. If I have to change it, it means something is either really fucking wrong with it or its time for a new build aka a whole new ass board anyway.
I'll update my GPU maybe once a generation, adding memory like ram and storage, but CPU is a once a build thing for me as I have no clue who swapping them things out lol
I did 2 builds the year prior just to avoid doing any of that and just separated my personal gaming build from my work PC for concept art / illustration.
My gaps are much longer lol
2001 Pentium 4
2009 Athlon quad core
2018 FX Black Edition 6 core
2023 i5-13000k gaming build sister, i7-13700K my gaming build, i9-13900K for workstation build
(i don't recall what i built for my sister in 2010 lol)
Last edited:
PeteBull
Member
There are 2 ways/schools of doing it, u either go most optimal price/perf and upgrade every 3-4years at max, or u just go for best gaming performance and only change ur cpu when u change to new rig.
Personally im a fan of 2nd option, currently using 8700k, got it at launch so end of 2017, so already 7 years past.
95% of games still hold stable 60 but some already dip below that, luckily for me i got huge backlog including many topquality games from previous gen(i think all gafers are guilty of accumulating huge backlogs, thats what happen when u got more money than time and genuinely love gaming ;P ).
So or so, waiting for what ngreedia gonna show us early jan and then gonna make decision if i like what i see, not even price wise, but powerdraw wise, as for the cpu, likely gonna be 9800x3d or if its still super overpriced/scalped even by stores themselfs, i could downgrade to 7800x3d, but then it would feel all kinds of wrong, knowing myself, so i just say it as very unlikely backup/budget option.
Personally im a fan of 2nd option, currently using 8700k, got it at launch so end of 2017, so already 7 years past.
95% of games still hold stable 60 but some already dip below that, luckily for me i got huge backlog including many topquality games from previous gen(i think all gafers are guilty of accumulating huge backlogs, thats what happen when u got more money than time and genuinely love gaming ;P ).
So or so, waiting for what ngreedia gonna show us early jan and then gonna make decision if i like what i see, not even price wise, but powerdraw wise, as for the cpu, likely gonna be 9800x3d or if its still super overpriced/scalped even by stores themselfs, i could downgrade to 7800x3d, but then it would feel all kinds of wrong, knowing myself, so i just say it as very unlikely backup/budget option.
Cakeboxer
Member
My memory isn't the best, but i started mid 90s with a Pentium 90, upgraded to some Cyrix i dont remember and after that to an Athlon XP 2100+. Graphics cards were Voodoo 1 + 3. Next CPU i remember was AMD Athlon 64 3200+
and after than a i5 3470. Some graphics cards i owned were GTX 970, GTX 1060 and RX 580. After that i went full console until mid last gen when i went full pc again.
Last edited:
Knightime_X
Member
Typically, when the upgrade is about +25% stronger and or has tech far superior vs what I am currently using.
The annoying part is by the time I want to upgrade, I have to upgrade not only the cpu but mobo and ram.
So I just end up getting a new PC at that point.
Currently, have a ryzen 7 3800x and it seems to be holding up rather nicely.
I kinda plan to look for the best am4 chip and go with that for a few more years before jumping to either intel or amd am5 chip.
Sort of indifferent between the 2 unless one has a clear advantage over the other with no reported issues.
The annoying part is by the time I want to upgrade, I have to upgrade not only the cpu but mobo and ram.
So I just end up getting a new PC at that point.
Currently, have a ryzen 7 3800x and it seems to be holding up rather nicely.
I kinda plan to look for the best am4 chip and go with that for a few more years before jumping to either intel or amd am5 chip.
Sort of indifferent between the 2 unless one has a clear advantage over the other with no reported issues.
Last edited:
MagusMajul
Member
i just buy an entierly new gaming rid from digital storm every 5 to 6 years
PeteBull
Member
Just get a proper pc rig, bro, this time be smart tho, even if u cant/dont want to build it urself(or u could just give 50$ to pc nerd u know or computer store clerk can do such service at low cost too), then at least get urself good prebuild pc, like for example this one:
Krathoon
Gold Member
Yeah. I will probably do that. Just get a pre-built and move my video card to it if it is still good.
Wooxsvan
Member
Mr1999
Gold Member
That's how I sold my 3070Ti when the 4000 series came out. Buyer was willing to pay what I was asking for but wanted to see the thing run so I had to move the PC to garage and let him load any game. Nice quick money, no shipping or fees involved.
MikeM
Member
I sold my 5600x/b550 mobo/6700xt and 32GB 3200mhz ram all on FB marketplace.
marjo
Member
I build a new PC every 5 to 7 years. I've still got a 8700k, so probably due for a new one next year. Prior to that, I had a 2500K I sometimes upgrade the graphics card in between my PC builds. I've currently got a 3080 (purchased in 2020) which plays most things just fine.
Last edited:
TransTrender
Gold Member
It used to be fairly often back in the late 90s and early 2000s, probably every 18 months or two years, but lately much less frequent.
2008 for an i7 920 and then 2016 for Skylake. Been wanting to make a new X3D build but I'm turned off by component prices these days. Works well enough with my 3090.
2008 for an i7 920 and then 2016 for Skylake. Been wanting to make a new X3D build but I'm turned off by component prices these days. Works well enough with my 3090.
cinnamonandgravy
Member
not often because upgrading cpu is a pain, and im almost always GPU-bound, not CPU.
2500k to 7600k (only upgraded to give 2500k to co-workers son--originally bought 7700k but its wild temp fluctuations pissed me off)
7600k to 12700k (upgraded for win11 cpu compatibility, 4 threads was getting insufficient, and microcenter sold a bundle for basically nothing)
tempted to go to 9800x3d or higher but ehhh
2500k to 7600k (only upgraded to give 2500k to co-workers son--originally bought 7700k but its wild temp fluctuations pissed me off)
7600k to 12700k (upgraded for win11 cpu compatibility, 4 threads was getting insufficient, and microcenter sold a bundle for basically nothing)
tempted to go to 9800x3d or higher but ehhh
Mr1999
Gold Member
I'm just waiting on ASUS ROG STRIX X670E-E motherboard to arrive and AIO Arctic Freezer III to replace my Arctic Freezer II since I lost the AM4/AM5 bracket. I will be using DDR5 6400MHZ 48GB, but I know I will only be able to get it to 1:1 with 6200MHZ. Not well versed into AMD Bios settings but I know I shouldn't be worrying about parking cores or anything with the 9800X3D. It will have to be a fresh OS install. GPU is a 4070 TI Super. There really is no game right now to enjoy so im doing it out of having extra money this year. I could have kept the 12700K but it was time. I will have to update bios once I receive motherboard since it wont detect the 9800X3D without an update. It should be up and running by this weekend.
Last edited:
manfestival
Member
Maybe once every 2 generations or so. Just depends on uplift. I had the 8700k and then eventually got the 12600k cause then the upgrade felt truly worthy. Then from the 12600k I am currently using the 13900k but really wish I had the 9800x3d. Can I afford it? Of course, but I can't really justify it. Especially since I am rocking that 4090
Yerd
Member
I do not keep track, so the most recent one is all the history I can muster. I haven't bought a new CPU since 2020, apparently. I upgraded my i7 to an i9 9900 when they dropped in price to $300. I have been rocking that cpu ever since.
I will be getting a new CPU when 5090 comes around. Looks like that's going to be a 9800x3d.
I will be getting a new CPU when 5090 comes around. Looks like that's going to be a 9800x3d.
mindfreak191
Member
I upgraded this year from a 3800x to 5700x3d, had my 3800x since end of 2019, would’ve kept it if newer games were not so dependent on better caching. CPU are usually a good investment and can last easily 4 years.
Codeblew
Member
I don't really ever upgrade a PC, I just build a new one every 2-4 years and keep the others as backups. I give away older ones to friends but I always keep at least one backup PC. My current PC is a 7700x but I plan to upgrade to a 9950x3d next year depending on reviews. I use my PC more for productivity than gaming but will get the x3d version if the productivity doesn't suffer much. I game mostly on my PS5 since I spend most of the day on my PC. It's nice to sit on my couch once in a while =)
samuelgregory
Neo Member
thank you for your suggestion
Last edited:
Mister Wolf
Member
Currently using 5800X3D. Next upgrade will be new motherboard with 10 series Ryzen or 9800X3D. Depends on the disparity in the benchmarks.
Mr1999
Gold Member
Just got my new build up and running few days ago. AMD Memory training boss was hard to get over. Not used to AMD so when I got hit with its memory training when I booted I honestly thought the board was bad but it seems this is normal for AM5 platform. Once I got passed that it never popped up again. Here is a quick cinebench r23 run. I know thats not what this cpu is for and other later gens might have better numbers, but not bad as far as normal computing stuff, easily better than the 12700K I had. It really shines in World of Warcraft, In Dornogal for example it gets really packed on Area 52 server and the 12700K I had would struggle, but it doesnt seem to be bothering the 9800X3D.
As for the overclock, I watched
and no crashes yet and ive been on it for a while now. I used EXPO I, 105.5 for BCLK 2 in asynchronous mode, which is motherboard dependent. UCLK=MEMCLK and boost clock 200 then adjust settings in curve shaper. Video explains it well here. Its really nice refreshing gaming experience, totally worth it.
As for the overclock, I watched
and no crashes yet and ive been on it for a while now. I used EXPO I, 105.5 for BCLK 2 in asynchronous mode, which is motherboard dependent. UCLK=MEMCLK and boost clock 200 then adjust settings in curve shaper. Video explains it well here. Its really nice refreshing gaming experience, totally worth it.
Last edited:
Forsete
Gold Member
1996: 486DX100
1998?: Pentium 2 400MHz
2002: Athlon XP 1900+
2004: Pentium 4
2009: Core i7 920
2015: i7 4790K
2020: Ryzen 9 5950X
5-6 years for me seems to be the current pace. However I don't have much interest in gaming on PC these days, so the 5950X will be with me longer.
1998?: Pentium 2 400MHz
2002: Athlon XP 1900+
2004: Pentium 4
2009: Core i7 920
2015: i7 4790K
2020: Ryzen 9 5950X
5-6 years for me seems to be the current pace. However I don't have much interest in gaming on PC these days, so the 5950X will be with me longer.
Last edited:
kruis
Exposing the sinister cartel of retailers who allow companies to pay for advertising space.
About every six years. I've always bought Intel CPUs, so a new CPU usually meant that I'd upgrade almost the entire PC: new CPU, motherboard, RAM, SSD boot drive, graphics card, PC case, power supply ... Since I usually buy top of the line parts, those upgrades aren't cheap.
IMO it doesn't make much sense to upgrade CPUs at a faster pace, since CPUs are only getting at most 10% faster each year. I could upgrade the PC every 2-3 years but I don't think I'd notice a 20-30% performance faster PC in general every day use. Upgrading my video card every 4 years makes a much bigger difference than upgrading the CPU.
IMO it doesn't make much sense to upgrade CPUs at a faster pace, since CPUs are only getting at most 10% faster each year. I could upgrade the PC every 2-3 years but I don't think I'd notice a 20-30% performance faster PC in general every day use. Upgrading my video card every 4 years makes a much bigger difference than upgrading the CPU.
Despite what the gaming industry and CPU vendors might tell you, for sub 100fps gaming a CPU lasts many many years before becoming a bottleneck, except for very few games.
My last CPU was a Ryzen 3600 from 2019 and I just recently upgraded in November, so it's been five years. Never had issues except two or three times and even 0,1% FPS lows were okay with that CPU most of the time. No need for AM5. Then again I mainly play at 60fps, sometimes even 40fps because of Path Tracing.
My last CPU was a Ryzen 3600 from 2019 and I just recently upgraded in November, so it's been five years. Never had issues except two or three times and even 0,1% FPS lows were okay with that CPU most of the time. No need for AM5. Then again I mainly play at 60fps, sometimes even 40fps because of Path Tracing.
Pegasus Actual
Member
That list is kind of same but different for me. AMD switches at pretty much the same points anyway:
Late 80s: Some kind of 8088(?) clone... Franklin brand, from Sears
1993: 486DX2/66mhz
1997: Pentium II 266mhz
1999: Celeron 300A ->450mhz (shocked I'm not seeing this legend all over these lists)
2002: Athlon XP 1800+
2005: Pentium D 805
2010: i7 930
2015: i7 6700k
2019: Ryzen 9 3950x
2021: Ryzen 9 5950x
Out of town right now but probably swapping out the 5950x AM4 with 9800X3D AM5 when I get back to my PC in a couple of weeks. I've always had trash luck with the silicon lottery as far as overlocking... certainly couldn't get that Celeron at 504mhz stable like many people did. i7 930 was a big overclocking loser as well. The 90s CPUs were all solid at least, and I think the 1800+ was pretty okay as well. Pentium D was a piece of shit. 930 and 6700k were just okay, and AM4 has given me big problems, at this point I blame the MSI mobo but who knows really.
Forsete
Gold Member
My Pentium 4 Prescott was a POS as well.
I remember when I got that computer going from the Athlon "What is that sound?".. It was the CPU cooler revving to the max.
The P4 ran so frigging hot. Eventually I got a 3rd party cooler for it which improved it slightly.
That computer was a HP, and it died on me twice. I think the first time it was the PSU and the second I didn't bother fixing it.
The P4 and the P2 were ""Home-PC" computers" which you could buy from your employer subsidised by the government to increase computer knowledge in the general population. Very good idea which I think helped a lot.
Dr. Acid Avatar
Member
Fuck it this seems like a great place to ask. If I'm going to eventually get a 5080 will I need to upgrade my 5800x3d also?
Yerd
Member
I had that Celeron. I remember it was the king in price to performance ratio. I just have extremely poor memory. I could not recall any dates or processor models associated with my upgrades. The fact that you can put a year to those upgrades is witchcraft to me. But, I think my upgrade path was very similar to yours from celeron to 6700k. I had an i3 in there somewhere.
Pre celeron I don't think I can remember anything close to what I had. Pentium something or other.
Pegasus Actual
Member
Some of the years could be off by 1. I fact checked a couple by checking the release dates. Everything past 2000 is probably in my Newegg or Amazon history. Might have been one CPU from Fry's, can't remember. Definitely grabbed a case there at least once.
I could probably put video cards to most of them from memory. The builds in the 90s and I guess that Athlon 1800+ spanned my school years (the Franklin was more of a 'family' computer). The 486 was a Packard Bell straight from Best Buy, but after a few months I wanted a sound card and later a CD-ROM so I figured out how to install them myself. From there it was all self-built. Those older builds still stick out in my mind more because I associate them with specific games I was looking to play, and specific summer breaks from the school.
My worst build was definitely that Pentium D 805 with an ATI x1800xt. Those might individually be the worst CPU and the worst vid card I ever owned, smash them together and they were a Voltron of failure. Should have just waited a little bit and gotten Core2Duo and Nvidia 7900GT. Despite that, Battlefield 2 ran real nice on it. Worth it for that alone. Of course, the Xbox 360 came out and kind of cucked it as well. Not that it was the place for Battlefield... buuuut after running the demo of COD4 on it and comparing it to Xbox 360 I got real sad. And got a 360. With Gears. And MW.