Haswell, and the 10-year rig revisited

[MrTeal]

I don't know... the first Core i7 processors came out in 2008, and still perform well today.

If you got a high end Haswell chip now, it just might still perform adequately 10 years from now.

The problem usually isn't the CPU itself. In 10 years most peripherals might be USB-C and only legacy stuff ships with USB-A. dGPUs might be running on a x32 slot that's incompatible with old motherboards.

It's always a crapshoot where you'll land on those transitions. A Nehalem or SB computer will probably end up have a very long supported life. You could also get not so lucky with the timing. 10 years ago I was running a Barton 2500 on an NF7 that was only a year or two old at that point, and already it was close to obsolete. Even 4 years after I bought it wasn't worth upgrading to play newer games; finding DDR was getting harder, AGP cards were limited to a few ATI models, most new drives were SATA which the MB didn't have, etc.
An upgrade to C2D cured a lot of platform problems, and that computer wasn't even that old.

 

[ElFenix]

dang necro threads

 

[twelfth]

I don't understand the concept. Why would you want to keep a computer for 10 years?

I managed to go 6 years with a fairly static configuration and even today it's not something that I max out much. When I upgraded the CPU, I went from an Athlon II x4 2.8Ghz to a Phenom II x6 2.8Ghz and it made little to no difference on my impressions of performance gains in the end. I do all my video editing and graphics rendering on this machine and (probably because it's not constantly molested by interns at the studio) it runs better than the Mac Pros where I work.

The only place where I have felt the slowdown on this setup is in I/O, drive throughput mostly. An SSD on this box was slower than the same SSD on a different box.

Performance has not progressed substantially like it had in years' past. I can very easily see sticking with something like a Xeon E3 1231v3 for another 6 to 10 years if someone were to build that now.

 

[2is]

Please don't compare a Phenom II to a Mac Pro, especially if you're talking about one that's new or even a generation or two old. It's not better, it's not even close, it's not even close to close, and even then, it's no where near that close.

 

[Hugo Drax]

Yeah, I'm not really understanding this inquiry either. Build the system, use it, if it lasts you 10 years, great.

10 years from now the new Intel CPU should offer a 40% boost in performance

So a 600 millisecond complex spreadsheet calculation would only take 360 milliseconds.

 

[Hugo Drax]

If, every year, we get a 5% improvement in CPU performance, that 105% of the speed of last year. Multiply that out, and for 5 years, you get something on the order of 127% increase over 5 years. (Too lazy to do the math for 10 years.)

Unless there's some breakthrough in CPU performance, then it is unlikely that codecs of the future will demand more CPU power than that which is available from a top-of-the-line CPU at that point in time, and using my 5% improvement progression, then it seems highly unlikely that Haswell will be rendered obsolete. Well, unless Intel gets TDP licked, and goes core-crazy.

Another thing to consider. Assuming that they still use some (backwards-compatible) form of PCI-Express for video cards 5 years into the future, then when 4K-res displays come down in price, the rig will need a video card upgrade just to support those resolutions in 2D, I think. (Will current Intel IGPs, or NV/AMD card drive 4K already?) A new video card, will also contain, most likely, hardware support for all the current newest codecs to drive that resolution when playing video.

You will not see annual 5% increases. The numbers will drop as they hit the physics brick wall. More like 1-3% annual increases. Like Air travel, we are stuck at subsonic air travel.

 

[twelfth]

Please don't compare a Phenom II to a Mac Pro, especially if you're talking about one that's new or even a generation or two old. It's not better, it's not even close, it's not even close to close, and even then, it's no where near that close.

Ctrl-F for "Mac ", no results found on all pages.

Might want to not be so presumptuous next time.

 

[MrTeal]

Ctrl-F for "Mac ", no results found on all pages.

Might want to not be so presumptuous next time.

Umm...

I do all my video editing and graphics rendering on this machine and (probably because it's not constantly molested by interns at the studio) it runs better than the Mac Pros where I work.

 

[2is]

Ctrl-F for "Mac ", no results found on all pages.

Might want to not be so presumptuous next time.

I managed to go 6 years with a fairly static configuration and even today it's not something that I max out much. When I upgraded the CPU, I went from an Athlon II x4 2.8Ghz to a Phenom II x6 2.8Ghz and it made little to no difference on my impressions of performance gains in the end. I do all my video editing and graphics rendering on this machine and (probably because it's not constantly molested by interns at the studio) it runs better than the Mac Pros where I work.

The only place where I have felt the slowdown on this setup is in I/O, drive throughput mostly. An SSD on this box was slower than the same SSD on a different box.

Performance has not progressed substantially like it had in years' past. I can very easily see sticking with something like a Xeon E3 1231v3 for another 6 to 10 years if someone were to build that now.

You aren't very good at searching, this is particularly bad since it was you that said it.

 

[myocardia]

Please don't compare a Phenom II to a Mac Pro, especially if you're talking about one that's new or even a generation or two old. It's not better, it's not even close, it's not even close to close, and even then, it's no where near that close.

No doubt, but I do like the way you phrased it. He obviously has no idea what's inside of a Mac Pro: http://www.apple.com/mac-pro/specs/

 

[twelfth]

You aren't very good at searching, this is particularly bad since it was you that said it.

I was looking for anyone else to have said it since you didn't bother to quote my post. Hard to tell where your hissy fit was directed at otherwise since there were other mentions of a Phenom II.

And yes. My Phenom II is faster than the Mac Pros in the studio. I should know, I use them every day. Do you use the Mac Pros I use in my studio? Do you care to tell me something I don't know about them?

 

[twelfth]

No doubt, but I do like the way you phrased it. He obviously has no idea what's inside of a Mac Pro: http://www.apple.com/mac-pro/specs/

Yes. Because a link to Apple's current spec sheet is a listing of all the Mac Pros that are in the studio. :eyeroll:

Good lord. You people are reactionary and presumptuous.

"runs better than the Mac Pros where I work." is what I said.

I DID NOT say "runs better than ALL MAC PROS EVER IN EXISTANCE"... you illiterate goon.

Man... and I thought HardForums were trolly.

 

[happy medium]

I still have a 7 year old Asus P5Q Deluxe board running a q9550 @ 4.0 with 16gb of 1066 ram, if I threw a ssd drive in it and a gtx970, I bet it would last 10 years. It might still game in 3 years.

 

[myocardia]

Yes. Because a link to Apple's current spec sheet is a listing of all the Mac Pros that are in the studio. :eyeroll:

lmfao, I linked to an almost 2 year old product. If your company doesn't have the capability to afford to have decent hardware, even 20 months after release, that's somehow my fault? :eyeroll:

I DID NOT say "runs better than ALL MAC PROS EVER IN EXISTANCE"... you illiterate goon.

It always amuses me, when the illiterate and ignorant children who troll here aren't able to spell words that I've been spelling correctly for more than 40 years. For instance, existence.

Man... and I thought HardForums were trolly.

It sounds to me as if you might want to go back to from where you trolled.

 

[twelfth]

lmfao, I linked to an almost 2 year old product. If your company doesn't have the capability to afford to have decent hardware, even 20 months after release, that's somehow my fault? :eyeroll:

Spoken like someone who knows nothing about the industry. We have many different generations of Mac Pros. Including Dual G5s. Workflow and maintaining the process is very important otherwise post production screeches to a halt and things don't make deadline.

What IS your fault, however, is automatically assuming you knew everything that you needed to know and claiming "He obviously has no idea what's inside of a Mac Pro"... Since you know what I don't know, go ahead and tell me what the specs are on every single seat in my studio. Go on. I'll wait as long as I need to.

Until then, there's absolutely no merit in your or 2is's claims. I was making a statement based on my personal and professional use case and experiences. I'm sorry what you think is the way you think all of it should be, reality be damned.

It always amuses me, when the illiterate and ignorant children who troll here aren't able to spell words that I've been spelling correctly for more than 40 years. For instance, existence.

Oh please. You're truly scraping the bottom of the barrel if you think that was even worth hopping on to dry hump.

Nevermind the fact that you claim to be over 40 and yet... behave like a child. Not many people online can get me to pity them but you've managed to do just that.

It sounds to me as if you might want to go back to from where you trolled.

Physician, heal thyself.

 

[2is]

I was looking for anyone else to have said it since you didn't bother to quote my post. Hard to tell where your hissy fit was directed at otherwise since there were other mentions of a Phenom II.

And yes. My Phenom II is faster than the Mac Pros in the studio. I should know, I use them every day. Do you use the Mac Pros I use in my studio? Do you care to tell me something I don't know about them?

Yes. Because a link to Apple's current spec sheet is a listing of all the Mac Pros that are in the studio. :eyeroll:

Good lord. You people are reactionary and presumptuous.

"runs better than the Mac Pros where I work." is what I said.

I DID NOT say "runs better than ALL MAC PROS EVER IN EXISTANCE"... you illiterate goon.

Man... and I thought HardForums were trolly.

My post came right after yours, you didn't find anyone else who mentioned mac, and yet you were still too stupid to figure out I was talking about you. Why is it that under identical circumstances, others were able to figure it out?

Furthermore, I specified which Mac's I was referring to. New or a generation or two old. Who's illiterate? You're out of your league here it seems.

 

[twelfth]

My post came right after yours, you didn't find anyone else who mentioned mac, and yet you were still too stupid to figure out I was talking about you. Why is it that under identical circumstances, others were able to figure it out?

Furthermore, I specified which Mac's I was referring to. New or a generation or two old. Who's illiterate? You're out of your league here it seems.

You said, and I quote...

"Please don't compare a Phenom II to a Mac Pro..."

And followed it with a bunch of assumptions.

I'm sorry you have a hard time accepting the fact that you were wrong about what I was referring to.

Guess what? My Phenom II *is* better than most of the Mac Pros at the studio. Shocker. People continue using older hardware that still works. Y'know? THE VERY TOPIC OF THIS THREAD?

 

[2is]

You said, and I quote...

"Please don't compare a Phenom II to a Mac Pro..."

And followed it with a bunch of assumptions.

I'm sorry you have a hard time accepting the fact that you were wrong about what I was referring to.

Guess what? My Phenom II *is* better than most of the Mac Pros at the studio. Shocker. People continue using older hardware that still works. Y'know? THE VERY TOPIC OF THIS THREAD?

Funny how everyone is on the same page except you. Your PII is shit, and you're clueless. These are facts of life you'll need to make friends with. The good news is you can do something about the PII.

 

[twelfth]

Funny how everyone is on the same page except you. Your PII is shit, and you're clueless. These are facts of life you'll need to make friends with. The good news is you can do something about the PII.

You and your goon is not "everyone."

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=1186&cmp[]=390

Look at that. A Mac Pro CPU getting its ass kicked. Hope that doesn't upset you too much.

There actually exists many examples of where a "Mac Pro" (as branded by Apple) can be outperformed by a Phenom II.

Whether or not they measure up to your standard of a "Mac Pro", the machines we have ARE Mac Pros. The lesson you need to learn is not everyone lives the reality you want to imagine. To think otherwise is to be autistic, which, honestly, would explain quite a bit.

 

[2is]

No, we aren't everyone, but still more than you. You being the singular person here that was utterly confused at my reply. Like I said, you can do something about that PII. Good luck in life.

 

[twelfth]

No, we aren't everyone, but still more than you. You being the singular person here that was utterly confused at my reply. Like I said, you can do something about that PII. Good luck in life.

Oh, please, child. Your projection isn't going to save your ass and the fact that you assumed wrong just to excuse your snit fit.

 

[2is]

I said your PII isn't going to be faster than a Mac Pro that's new or a generation or two old. That's not an assumption. You can come back and say that the Mac Pro's are much older than that, but that just means you're trying desperately hard to make yourself feel better about your crappy PII by making a comparison that is completely irrelevant. However you slice it, you've dug yourself a hole you can't get out of.

On a side note, I'm glad this schooling session appears to be paying off. I mean, I didn't even quote you and you knew exactly who I was referring to this time. You've come a long way, keep it up!

 

[twelfth]

I said your PII isn't going to be faster than a Mac Pro that's new or a generation or two old. That's not an assumption. You can come back and say that the Mac Pro's are much older than that, but that just means you're trying desperately hard to make yourself feel better about your crappy PII by making a comparison that is completely irrelevant. However you slice it, you've dug yourself a hole you can't get out of.

On a side note, I'm glad this schooling session appears to be paying off. I mean, I didn't even quote you and you knew exactly who I was referring to this time. You've come a long way, keep it up!

Now you're just lying.

You said: "Please don't compare a Phenom II to a Mac Pro, especially..."

You never excluded older Mac Pros in your original statement. You only emphasized 'especially' for one that was new or recent.

The fact that you would be so shallow over an example given of older hardware that still does well today in a THREAD ABOUT RUNNING OLDER HARDWARE is telling. It's pretty sad to value your self on something so fleeting as what constitutes current hardware. Then again, zealots rarely live rewarding lives outside of tech fashion.

I feel sorry for you since this seems to be the only way you can present yourself. Unlike you, I know when to quit. Welcome to my ignore list.

 

[2is]

The way I present myself [to you] is directly correlated to your attitude. You came in here calling people illiterate when the real problem was a deficiency on your part. You literally had to be told you were the one who brought up a Mac. Apparently, not being quoted threw you for one heck of a loop.