future-proofed for 1-2 years?

[VirtualLarry]

Just wondering. I'm finally building my quad-core screamer gaming rigs, both will have Q6600 and HD4850 512MB in CF. My first rig is almost built (don't have the video cards in yet), but I got it overclocked to 3.6Ghz (check the CPU forums for my thread).

Will such a machine (with 8GB RAM) handle any PC game to come out in the next year? Two years?

I'm hoping that I won't have to upgrade again for two years. Since Intel apparently intends to come out with a 2-core/4-thread 32nm Nehalem-derivative CPU for the mainstream market next year, I'm hoping that my Q6600 quad-core will still be competive.
I'm less certain about the video card market. I might have to upgrade those again in a year or so.

Currently, the only LCD monitor that I own are 1680x1050, so I don't need extreme high-res or AA.

 

[zerocool84]

"Future Proofing" all depends on the user. If you can deal with not being able to run things at the highest setting then it could last you a long time. Nobody knows exactly what the games of next year will need to run.

 

[apoppin]

absolutely not

it can't handle the latest DX10 games with max details at even 16x10- right now!

try running S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Clear Sky benchmark .. it brings a 4870-X2 or GTX280 to its knees ... at 14x9 !!
- and that is not even using Dx10.1 with the extra filtering that is available

:Q

 

[dguy6789]

Running crossfire of 512MB cards isn't a good idea. Anything that doesn't use more than 512MB of video memory, a single 4870 can run completely fine. The performance gain by running crossfire is only seen and used at settings that use more than 512MB of memory.

 

[bigsnyder]

Nothing wrong with 4850 crossfired. One of the few multicard setups that makes noticeable gains that is actually financially viable. I am not saying you will witness miracles, but I think the 4850s are at their best in a crossfire setup. As far as CPU, I am in a similiar position, though I want to go with one of the newer 45nm parts like the Q9650 (or Q9550 if I can get guaranteed E0 stepping). Currently running E6400 @ 3.2Ghz.

Just for point of reference check this article.

 

[techboie]

It will run comfortably if playing 80% games at high if not max settings at 14x9 or 16x10 suits you. Neverthless it would be a better idea to get a E5200 + 4830 today and upgrade 6-12 months down the line.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

You should be fine for 1-2 years. You'll get similar gameplay experiences as you would from a (stock) Core i7 rig or any other quad core. Although you should have went with a 45nm quad, whether it be a Q8xxx or Q9xxx chip, because of the reduced power consumption. If you look at the link I just posted, the overclocked Q6600 needs way more power (70-80W) than the overclocked 45nm quads.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: apoppin
absolutely not

it can't handle the latest DX10 games with max details at even 16x10- right now!

try running S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Clear Sky benchmark .. it brings a 4870-X2 or GTX280 to its knees ... at 14x9 !!
- and that is not even using Dx10.1 with the extra filtering that is available

:Q

ROFL. Come on that game is just an anomaly.

Anyway O.P. Why a Q6600? Why not a Q9400? Nearly same price as Q6600.

For such resolution a single 4850 will do. You can always add one later or buy another card that is much faster than 4850.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: apoppin
absolutely not

it can't handle the latest DX10 games with max details at even 16x10- right now!

try running S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Clear Sky benchmark .. it brings a 4870-X2 or GTX280 to its knees ... at 14x9 !!
- and that is not even using Dx10.1 with the extra filtering that is available

:Q

ROFL. Come on that game is just an anomaly.

Anyway O.P. Why a Q6600? Why not a Q9400? Nearly same price as Q6600.

For such resolution a single 4850 will do. You can always add one later or buy another card that is much faster than 4850.

No it isn't and it is a portend of what is coming

i am laughing at the idea of "future proof for 2 years" .. when it cannot even play DX10 games fully maxed out now
:roll:

nothing wrong with 4870/512MB either .. for crossfire .. just a few games will have ANY difference with a 1GB CF
.. if you are gonna compromise, might as well as compromise a bit more

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: apoppin
absolutely not

it can't handle the latest DX10 games with max details at even 16x10- right now!

try running S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Clear Sky benchmark .. it brings a 4870-X2 or GTX280 to its knees ... at 14x9 !!
- and that is not even using Dx10.1 with the extra filtering that is available

:Q

ROFL. Come on that game is just an anomaly.

Anyway O.P. Why a Q6600? Why not a Q9400? Nearly same price as Q6600.

For such resolution a single 4850 will do. You can always add one later or buy another card that is much faster than 4850.

No it isn't and it is a portend of what is coming

i am laughing at the idea of "future proof for 2 years" .. when it cannot even play DX10 games fully maxed out now
:roll:

nothing wrong with 4870/512MB either .. for crossfire .. just a few games will have ANY difference with a 1GB CF
.. if you are gonna compromise, might as well as compromise a bit more

1 game from unknown Russian coders who made 2 games? Yeah that's really shaping the future. :laugh: Look at all the recently released games and they are mostly console ports that run great on $80 card. If anything this multi-platform coded for the lowest denominator is what is shaping the future.

 

[LOUISSSSS]

lol mr larry, you can't be asking us to predict the future for you right now. it all depends on what software(I.E. games/programs) comes out for the next 1-2 years.

 

[ShawnD1]

I bought my E6600 when it was ~top of the line in November 2006 and it's still going strong. Newer games like Fallout 3 are still severely GPU bottlenecked, so I'll probably be able to get another year out of this CPU. This is how it usually is; only RTS games should be CPU bottlenecked.

That being said, I think a Q6600 will last 2 years. Not including the overpriced Intel i7, an overclocked Q6600 (or its AMD counterpart) is a stone's throw away from top of the line. A top of the line CPU should easily get 2 years of service.

As for the video card, you can't future proof those. I'm sorry but you just can't. A CPU can last a good 2-3 years of gaming, but a video card never will. The card I bought with that E6600 was a 7950GT, which would be equivalent to maybe a 9800GTX+ today (best card of last generation). That thing lasted maybe a year and a half before games were not comfortable to play. I would need to turn off all shadows, turn off specular lighting, run at 0xAA, lower the resolution, etc. I replaced that 7950GT with a 8800GTX around the time the 9800 cards were coming out, and now even this monster of a card is running out of gas. I need to play Fallout at 1440x900 instead of 1680x1050, 0xAA, shadows off, water refelctions off (these are worse than shadows for killing frame rate).

 

[Kraeoss]

indeed that's like asking if the rig in my sig is present-proof lol.....

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: apoppin
absolutely not

it can't handle the latest DX10 games with max details at even 16x10- right now!

try running S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Clear Sky benchmark .. it brings a 4870-X2 or GTX280 to its knees ... at 14x9 !!
- and that is not even using Dx10.1 with the extra filtering that is available

:Q

ROFL. Come on that game is just an anomaly.

Anyway O.P. Why a Q6600? Why not a Q9400? Nearly same price as Q6600.

For such resolution a single 4850 will do. You can always add one later or buy another card that is much faster than 4850.

No it isn't and it is a portend of what is coming

i am laughing at the idea of "future proof for 2 years" .. when it cannot even play DX10 games fully maxed out now
:roll:

nothing wrong with 4870/512MB either .. for crossfire .. just a few games will have ANY difference with a 1GB CF
.. if you are gonna compromise, might as well as compromise a bit more

1 game from unknown Russian coders who made 2 games? Yeah that's really shaping the future. :laugh: Look at all the recently released games and they are mostly console ports that run great on $80 card. If anything this multi-platform coded for the lowest denominator is what is shaping the future.

you want a *list* of games that will challenge the OP's "future-proof" rig - right now?

 

[biostud]

use a single 4850 until you feel like it struggles with the games you play, then see if the best option is to buy another 4850 or a newer DX11 card.

 

[geokilla]

Virtual Larry asking this type of question?! DID HE GET HACKED?! lol

If it was me, I'd sell that crossfire setup and get a single GTX260 Core 216 or ATI 4870. Then I wouldn't upgrade my computer for at least 3 years cus I'm an el-cheapo.

With a 1680X1050 resolution, I think it'd last you a good 2 to 3 years, unless you plan on running Crysis at max everything.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: apoppin
you want a *list* of games that will challenge the OP's "future-proof" rig - right now?

Why not just list them instead?

 

[apoppin]

Why not just list them instead?

Instead of what?
- the OP does make it more of a challenge because it is 16x10; and we don't know if he will play DX9 games in XP for the next two years
-besides, i have to leave for work now


[even though i am already at work; and when i get home from work i will also still be at work]

 

[Leyawiin]

Like everyone said, it all depends on your expectations. I'm currently using a 22 inch monitor with an AMD X2 6400+ paired with an 8800 GTX. I've had the CPU for one year and the GPU for two. Its fine for medium to high settings on any game I play - but then again all I play are RPGs and MMOs - FPS games aren't even on my radar. I'm sure what you are building can "handle" any game coming out in the next two years depending on how reasonable your expectations are. About the only people who can max games all the time are those with deep pockets and a constant rotating out of hardware as the best of the new comes on the market.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Why not just list them instead?

Instead of what?
- the OP does make it more of a challenge because it is 16x10; and we don't know if he will play DX9 games in XP for the next two years
-besides, i have to leave for work now


[even though i am already at work; and when i get home from work i will also still be at work]

You are the one who wanted to list the games. Why not just list those games.

 

[3MDR]

There is no such thing as future-proofing.

 

[alcoholbob]

It's more than good enough to play any game at high settings (minus high quality textures since you lack VRAM) for years to come.

Stalker looks like garbage and runs terrible. Guess what, so does NWN2 and its several years old, I can barely play it on my system. Is his system not past-proof either? Badly coded games are badly coded games. Popular games and AAA titles will be well optimized even at launch. That system is fine. Most games are designed with consoles on mind, which is basically a Core 2 at 3GHz with a 7900GTX.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: apoppin

Why not just list them instead?

Instead of what?
- the OP does make it more of a challenge because it is 16x10; and we don't know if he will play DX9 games in XP for the next two years
-besides, i have to leave for work now


[even though i am already at work; and when i get home from work i will also still be at work]

You are the one who wanted to list the games. Why not just list those games.

no i didn't

i asked if it was necessary
.. and this is becoming silly and completely beside the point

future-proof is an oxymoron
- especially when you are guessing "HW & 2 years" into the future

i say 'no' .. but then my expectations are [really] really high
- and i am back to work .. c-ya!

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: apoppin

Why not just list them instead?

Instead of what?
- the OP does make it more of a challenge because it is 16x10; and we don't know if he will play DX9 games in XP for the next two years
-besides, i have to leave for work now


[even though i am already at work; and when i get home from work i will also still be at work]

You are the one who wanted to list the games. Why not just list those games.

no i didn't

i asked if it was necessary
.. and this is becoming silly and completely beside the point

future-proof is an oxymoron
- especially when you are guessing "HW & 2 years" into the future

i say 'no' .. but then my expectations are [really] really high
- and i am back to work .. c-ya!

You don't know either. So why pretend like you do know what the future for these dually setup? 8800gtx was one of those cards that lasted more than 3 years. A dual card solution can easily be one of those setup as well. 1 or 2 years isn't a long time. I know your expectations are high. not everyone has those expectations.

 

[apoppin]

8800gtx was one of those cards that lasted more than 3 years.

what the hell are you talking about? As usual you exaggerate with some revisionist history and then try to put your speculation as superior.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_8_Series

[/quote]The 8800 series, codenamed G80, was launched on November 8, 2006 with the release of the GeForce 8800 GTX and GTS.[/quote]

Letsee, 280GTX was released in June, 2008; just over 1-1/2 years later
:roll:

THIS COMING November will BE 3 years i.e. Nov 8, 2009; 9 months away is the 3 year anniversary of 8800GTX's release. Sure it "lasted"; two years; maybe, if you made a late transition to 19x12 and DX10