Does anyone think the desktops we have now might be the last we have?

[TurtleCrusher]

I'm feeling like what I and most of you already have might be enough for a very, very long time. The only upgrade I'm eyeing is a GPU upgrade, and that isn't all that necessary.

Once you utilize the available upgrades to your boards like adding a dedicated gigabit LAN card, higher-end sound card, HD/DTV Tuner, dual band wifi-N, and a gaming video card... What is there that these desktops cannot do? This also might be the last decade where you can fully customize your computer with a cache of add-in cards. I cannot fathom upgrading from what I already have. Gaming, multimedia, productivity... There's nothing they cannot do exceptionally well. If it were not for a specific game I'd still be using my OC C2Q build. Most everything isn't too much better.

In the next 3-5 years we'll all readily have what we currently own in our desktops right on our laps in ultrabooks in terms of CPU/GPU power. It seems like Intel has hit a brick wall in clock speeds and started going more-cores and lowering TDP. AMD took the route of more cores and more throughput at the expense of efficiency, but clearly will be taking the same route as Intel once Zen hits the market. I don't see the desktop lines going anywhere but adding more cores at marginally lower or similar TDP.

Is this your last meaningful build?

 

[Termie]

Given that desktop sales are actually improving, I don't think the desktop is on its last legs. Tablets shook the foundation of personal computing, but people have gravitated back to laptops and more interestingly desktops simply because there's so much a portable computing product isn't ideal for.

We already have in our hands the power of a desktop from a decade ago. That hasn't stopped the progress of desktops or people's interest in building them.

 

[sandorski]

A video card upgrade is all I really needish right now. However, eventually I'll need a new system and it will almost certainly be another Desktop. That said, I think there are many people who will never get a Desktop or who will never get one again.

 

[frozentundra123456]

I'm feeling like what I and most of you already have might be enough for a very, very long time. The only upgrade I'm eyeing is a GPU upgrade, and that isn't all that necessary.

Once you utilize the available upgrades to your boards like adding a dedicated gigabit LAN card, higher-end sound card, HD/DTV Tuner, dual band wifi-N, and a gaming video card... What is there that these desktops cannot do? This also might be the last decade where you can fully customize your computer with a cache of add-in cards. I cannot fathom upgrading from what I already have. Gaming, multimedia, productivity... There's nothing they cannot do exceptionally well. If it were not for a specific game I'd still be using my OC C2Q build. Most everything isn't too much better.

In the next 3-5 years we'll all readily have what we currently own in our desktops right on our laps in ultrabooks in terms of CPU/GPU power. It seems like Intel has hit a brick wall in clock speeds and started going more-cores and lowering TDP. AMD took the route of more cores and more throughput at the expense of efficiency, but clearly will be taking the same route as Intel once Zen hits the market. I don't see the desktop lines going anywhere but adding more cores at marginally lower or similar TDP.

Is this your last meaningful build?

So you think in 3 to 5 years we will have the equivalent of an i7 4790k and a GTX980 in a laptop or ultrabook? It would be great if you are right, but it seems highly unlikely. In fact mobile almost seems to be a race to the bottom to get the longest battery life and low power consumption. So I think there will always be a place for desktops for high performance applications. Now how much progress will be made from a high end desktop of today to one of 3 to 5 years from now is the question, and it may not be much.

Personally, I have an i5 and a low end gpu, and feel no great need in the foreseable future for an upgrade. It is plenty fast for everything but gaming, and none of the new games coming out interest me enough to spend money on a gpu upgrade. Plenty of older games in my steam library to catch up on.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

Given that desktop sales are actually improving, I don't think the desktop is on its last legs. Tablets shook the foundation of personal computing, but people have gravitated back to laptops and more interestingly desktops simply because there's so much a portable computing product isn't ideal for.

We already have in our hands the power of a desktop from a decade ago. That hasn't stopped the progress of desktops or people's interest in building them.

Maybe I just don't see or hear from the people buying them or using them. My wife wanted a laptop for the first time instead of asking for a desktop. All of my roommates and practically everyone I know has just a laptop. If people still buy them, I don't see it.

A video card upgrade is all I really needish right now. However, eventually I'll need a new system and it will almost certainly be another Desktop. That said, I think there are many people who will never get a Desktop or who will never get one again.

We're in the exact same boat, clearly with the FX and (5/6)870 1GB. It's going to be really hard justifying a new build though. A GPU upgrade is justifiable for me for the upcoming games.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

So you think in 3 to 5 years we will have the equivalent of an i7 4790k and a GTX980 in a laptop or ultrabook? It would be great if you are right, but it seems highly unlikely. In fact mobile almost seems to be a race to the bottom to get the longest battery life and low power consumption. So I think there will always be a place for desktops for high performance applications. Now how much progress will be made from a high end desktop of today to one of 3 to 5 years from now is the question, and it may not be much.

Personally, I have an i5 and a low end gpu, and feel no great need in the foreseable future for an upgrade. It is plenty fast for everything but gaming, and none of the new games coming out interest me enough to spend money on a gpu upgrade. Plenty of older games in my steam library to catch up on.

Maybe an i7 4790S and a GeForce 750 or Radeon 270 in 5 years in an ultrabook. That doesn't seem out of the realm of possibilities. Most gamers have that or less in their newly built desktops.

 

[Atreidin]

For as long as I've been into computers, people have been seriously over-estimating how powerful mobile computing will be "in a few years" compared to desktops; then a few years later, forgetting their old prediction and making a new one.

 

[James999]

Is this your last meaningful build?

This is a question I think about a lot. A little over five years ago, I put together a really strong build. It's a Core 2 Duo E8500 OC'd at 3.5 Ghz, an ATI HD 4800 and 4GB of slooowww (by today's standards) DDR3. This was the last of five builds over the space of maybe eight years.

At the time, I was asking myself the same question that you pose. I knew that build was going to last for a while, it was making almost 100 fps in Q3A. So here we are five years later, and my system is finally feeling like a limitation. It cannot play some new games at all.

I think the upgrade cycle will continue to lengthen (maybe 6 - 8 yrs this time until you need a faster system), but will always move up and to the right.

 

[Zorander]

When I built my previous i7-860 system five years ago, I felt this way and honestly it would still hold true even today. Overclocked at 3.8GHz, it managed perfectly well with today's games. The 4690K system I upgraded to brought the clear advantages of thermal and power efficiency but nothing bleeding obvious in terms of minimum performance.

Will the 4690K be my last meaningful build? Looking in retrospect, it will be replaced in 5 years time or sooner once games/applications start demanding more than 4 cores.

 

[Red Squirrel]

We're at an odd situation. Desktops are no longer as popular as they were because the general public does not care about their privacy and just does everything on the cloud, but we're also at a point where we don't need any more power and there has not really been any significant upgrades available due to this. so even as enthusiasts we don't have much reason to upgrade. In fact my latest build (still in testing phase) is actually a downgrade from my last build, I just wanted a secondary machine and figured the i3 would do the job just fine as it will be a Linux machine. My more powerful build is an i7 which I will dedicate to Windows/gaming.

Other than that I don't see any reason to build another or upgrade for a while.

The danger with this state is that component sales are going down, thus they may either make them more expensive or start to stop selling them altogether. It will be a sad day when sites like NCIX, Tigerdirect and Newegg die off due to lack of sales.

It seems there's still a big enough enthusiast market to keep them going though, for now.

Of course, I remember thinking my AMD 2000+ was super powerful and that I'd never need to upgrade again. So who knows. If anything I see myself upgrading more in parallel. Adding more cores and/or more CPUs and/or more machines to my virtual infrastructure. Most of the processing these days happens at the servers and not the workstation, at least in my workflow case.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

If relevant software can keep up with the must-have features and take advantage of bleeding edge hardware, then maybe I can see another build in the near future. The problem is that websites are stonewalled into a spot where they can't really be any more demanding or else those with their iPads and mega phones wouldn't be able to view without severe lag.

If it wasn't for a damn basketball video game on PC I'd still be on my Q8200 build. That alone I find crazy...

 

[James999]

If it wasn't for a damn basketball video game on PC I'd still be on my Q8200 build. That alone I find crazy...

LOL, for me it was the latest Wolfenstein. The graphics card was not up to the task, so the game has been sitting on the shelf for a few months. I let that go, as it was not enough by itself to dive into a new build. There were other small shortfalls as well, nothing major. Finally my current system started to feel like a real limitation when some optimization work I was doing was taking up to 20 minutes to complete a single run. So I took the plunge and am putting together a new build. My guess is that this build should cover what I need for a long time, maybe 8 - 10 yrs, but who knows. Obviously the future is uncertain.

 

[James999]

If anything I see myself upgrading more in parallel. Adding more cores and/or more CPUs and/or more machines to my virtual infrastructure.

This is a real dilemma: do you have a rolling upgrade cycle over time, a few hundred dollars every 12-18 mos? Or do you stretch each build until it no longer is fully functional and then do a whole new system? I find myself now in a position where the full rebuild makes more sense. Just hoping that my investment will last for more than five years.

 

[mfenn]

Just hoping that my investment will last for more than five years.

A computer isn't an investment, so in that sense you already know the outcome. It's going to be worthless soon enough and you'll never make your money back by selling it. It's a very useful tool for creating income in other ways, but it's a business expense just like your electricity and ISP bills.

 

[mfenn]

Is this your last meaningful build?

Yes.

But it's also my first meaningful build. My current PC configuration is the result of a constant evolution from the first machine I built back in 2001. I might spend ~$500/yr on average and keep a machine that is always somewhere around upper-midrange or low high-end in terms of performance.

That's the true strength of the desktop in my opinion. You don't have to go all out and spend a lot on a non-upgradable machine that will become painfully slow at some point. You can instead spend a relatively small amount of money each year and in return get a machine that is fast forever.* In other words you get a flat line in terms of relative performance instead of a jarring sawtooth pattern.

* Who knows if or how long enough people will keep using standard desktop PCs for this to be a viable market, but I hope it lasts for a good long while yet.

 

[James999]

A computer isn't an investment, so in that sense you already know the outcome. It's going to be worthless soon enough and you'll never make your money back by selling it. It's a very useful tool for creating income in other ways, but it's a business expense just like your electricity and ISP bills.

Well, it's actually a capital investment if it is being used in a business or other profit-generating activity. Agreed, it does depreciate over time (and depreciation is considered an expense), and has little or no residual value. An pure expense item would be more like consumables that are used to run a printer or dub copies of DVDs (or the expenses you mentioned, somehow I missed this before).

I would note that, apropos of other current discussion, the longer the lifespan of your capital asset, the lower the depreciation expense during each year it is in operation.

 

[Cerb]

No. Given expected process, CPU, and GPU improvements, my next gaming rig is still going to have to exhaust around 200-300W, and not too loudly. I'd use an IO-filled SFF box, if it would do the job, but suitable replacements in tiny form factors still appear to be many years away, barring disruptive tech.

 

[Bubbleawsome]

We already have 4790ks in laptops actually. Now we just need a few years to get the 980 in there too. I think with power improvements we are closer to fitting a full GPU into a laptop, which would make it much closer to a desktop. I am 100% sure we will have laptops that beat a 4790k and 1 980 in 5 years.

Will this be my last build? No. Will my next build be my last? No.

In the next few years we are getting stacked RAM, mainstream DDR4, faster SSDs, possibly 6-cores in the mainstream, and tons of power improvements. By the end of this decade we might see silicon alternatives that allow us higher clocks.

tl;dr by 2020 we will probably see 6-cores at 4.5-5.0Ghz, 16-32GB RAM, GPUs 5-8 times as powerful as today (with lower power consumption, 8GB++ VRAM) and SSDs that are near instantaneous.

There will be reasons to upgrade.

 

[James999]

Will this be my last build? No. Will my next build be my last? No.

In the next few years we are getting stacked RAM, mainstream DDR4, faster SSDs, possibly 6-cores in the mainstream, and tons of power improvements. By the end of this decade we might see silicon alternatives that allow us higher clocks.

tl;dr by 2020 we will probably see 6-cores at 4.5-5.0Ghz, 16-32GB RAM, GPUs 5-8 times as powerful as today (with lower power consumption, 8GB++ VRAM) and SSDs that are near instantaneous.

There will be reasons to upgrade.

I agree with you, these will all be seductive upgrades. But how long until they become necessary to keep up with the next generation of games and other software?

 

[bigboxes]

No. I'm going to assume that most on this forum are enthusiasts and/or professionals. We will always want or need performance. Regardless of what develops in other areas in computing, desktop will always have it's place. I like my tablet, but it's primarily for consumption. Now, if I needed to have power while on the road then a laptop would be a necessity. I just don't need one. When I'm out of town on business I use my tablet to watch movies, stream sports and cruise the internet when I'm back at the motel. When I need to be productive I've got my desktop. Comfortable, reliable and quick. If need be I can repair or upgrade fairly easily. It's roomy to house my cooling and plethora of storage drives. As monitors become larger and higher in resolution there will still be a need for dedicated video.

Changes in technology happen on a regular basis. You may think that you have all you need, that your system is quite powerful for your daily tasks. Then five years later you see that technology has advanced on all fronts. There was a recent thread on upgrade cycle (Virtual Larry). We definitely don't need to upgrade as often as we used to.

 

[Berliner]

For me? Certainly not.

While I have 4 cores now, I know that I will have to be ugrapding once I upgrade my camera to something with 24 or 36 Megapixel or more RAW files.

So I have to upgrade my desktop to keep up with other technological changes.

The same will happen for a lot of people due to 4k and the technologies following that.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Nope. We're probably a decade or more away from an ultrabook having integrated graphics that are good enough for me, and I'm not all that picky -- still using a GTX 680 and i5-2500 from 3 generations ago.

 

[escrow4]

I upgrade to a $1K GPU annually assuming my old one can't crack 60FPS/maxed at 1200p. I could never work on a laptop. There isn't one available that has 4770+ performance on tap unless you spring for an MX CPU in a $3K laptop. And that $3K laptop will be obsolete in 6 months. Eventually though Intel will hit the wall permanently, there is only so much you can shrink and innovate and then, well . . . . . . .

 

[Cerb]

I upgrade to a $1K GPU annually assuming my old one can't crack 60FPS/maxed at 1200p. I could never work on a laptop. There isn't one available that has 4770+ performance on tap unless you spring for an MX CPU in a $3K laptop. And that $3K laptop will be obsolete in 6 months. Eventually though Intel will hit the wall permanently, there is only so much you can shrink and innovate and then, well . . . . . . .

Plus, that laptop is going to be a heavy desktop replacement type...

 

[utahraptor]

I think there is one more purchase at a minimum in my future. I have ivybridge/ 680 gtx and I am holding out for skylake/best gpu at time. I think having a very powerful PC will be a big bonus when virtual reality hits mainstream.