If you weren’t in a hurry to build, would next-gen be worth the wait (hexa-core)?

[essential]

I’ve been a member of these forums a while. I read a lot, and typically don’t post unless I can’t find an answer through reading.

Anyway, I’m the kind of guy who builds a system, and goes big, one every 8-10 years, as opposed to smaller but better systems every 2-3 years.

My current system is an A64 3500+ that I built in like 2002-2003. I’m ready to build again soon, and just received a $2,000 tax refund, but I’m not in a rush.

I want to build an Intel based system, ideally a hexa-core.

I don’t game or overclock, my most CPU intensive tasks are:

1) Encoding (main reason why I’d love a hexa-core).
2) Run at least 1 VM while doing other normal tasks.
3) Tons of multi-tasking in general

Based on wanting a hexa-core Intel based machine, I’ve come to the conclusion from reading that LGA 2011 (Sandy or Ivy) is probably the way to go, however it’s looking like that won’t be possible till later this year or early next year. Once again I’m not in a hurry, but I could build a quad-core Sandy Bridge this month if I wanted.

Currently the cheapest hexa-core Intel is $600 on Newegg, and I read that the next gen’s could be in the $300-$400 range, which I feel is very reasonable.

I read a lot of threads and then general consensus is not to wait for tomorrows technology because you will continuously be waiting, which I typically agree.

I know either way it’ll be any build will be light years ahead of what I have now, but I’m not sure. If you were me, not in a hurry, and in desire of something that looks to be what’s coming in the next generation release, would you build now and sacrifice 2 cores and build a machine with a motherboard that won’t be able to take the next-gen hexa-core you desire, or would you wait?

Thanks for any opinions.

 

[ShadowVVL]

I would wait for 2011s later in the year. the 2600k will still be around if you get impatient and there pretty fast about 8-10x faster then your current system.

 

[Topweasel]

Don't get a Hexa core i7 unless you want to wait. 1336 is officially dead, SB quad core beats it in just about every standard desktop utilization.

No one should tell you to wait for the next technology unless its right around the corner (a month or 2 off). But you also shouldn't use outdated and deadend products over core count. If you want to build now then build a 2600k, if your willing to wait a ~1.75 months you could see where AMD sits with its octa core BD. If you really want Intel that is >4 cores then wait till 2011.

 

[aphelion02]

I understand long upgrade cycles, but 8-10 years is completely ridiculous. I suggest you get a $1000 computer now and another $1000 computer later. Then you will have great - decent systems the whole time instead of having complete overkill now and something worthless in 5 years.

Get a i5-2500k system now and save the money.

 

[alcoholbob]

That said, funny enough the 3500+ can still run a fair bit of games on the lower detail settings.

I remember playing Bioshock on minimum settings on a A64 3200+. It was somewhat laggy but still playable.

Jumping on a 6- or 8-core LGA 2011 is not a bad idea though. You've waited long enough so what's a little more? and an octocore system would hold up well for another 8-10 years I think

 

[edplayer]

Sounds like you already made up your mind. If you are comfortable with what you have now, keep waiting. I would if I were in your position.

The general consensus is that the general populace is stupid so make up your own mind. You want a hex core and you are aware of "2nd gen Core" tech so waiting makes sense if your current computer is acceptable for a few more months.

 

[RobertPters77]

Is your cpu socket 754? You can probably purchase a turion x2 cpu off ebay for like 50$. Socket 754 was used both as a desktop and mobile socket. I had a desktop 754 system running a Turion x2.

Edit: Gah, I'm sorry. I meant to say I had a dual CPU Asrock motherboard(K8 combo-z). Turion X2 is not pin compatible with s754. My Asrock could run either or 754 or 939.

 

[WhoBeDaPlaya]

You've waited this long. Wait just a little longer to see how S-2011 and Bulldozer play out.

 

[Soccerman06]

Im getting Hanswell or Rockwell, possibly IB depending on how good tock is.

 

[dac7nco]

I'm looking at Ivy Bridge at the least... I'm wondering if Ivy's "Improved Transcoding Engine" will have greater software support, and not just increased speed. I can understand waiting around 8 years to upgrade; In 2003 my top-of-the-line home systems were a P4/HT and a Sparcstation, with around 500GB total storage. I've fallen into this downward spiral of ballooning needs, and I started with a Commodore PET. Westmere has broken my budget until 2012, at the very least.

Daimon

 

[essential]

I understand long upgrade cycles, but 8-10 years is completely ridiculous. I suggest you get a $1000 computer now and another $1000 computer later. Then you will have great - decent systems the whole time instead of having complete overkill now and something worthless in 5 years.

Get a i5-2500k system now and save the money.

I can’t budget a new build every 2-3 years. I can, however, justify $1,500-$2,000 right now. Also, my system isn’t worthless now, it’s just become frustrating. For normal email/websurfing, it’s perfectly fine for the most part, I can even still run PS CS3 well.

Sounds like you already made up your mind. If you are comfortable with what you have now, keep waiting. I would if I were in your position.

The general consensus is that the general populace is stupid so make up your own mind. You want a hex core and you are aware of "2nd gen Core" tech so waiting makes sense if your current computer is acceptable for a few more months.

I actually hadn’t made up my mind. If the majority of posts said the gains of a current gen Quad-Core SB to a Hexa-Core SB/IB would be minimal, I might have considered just building now. My current computer is acceptable for a few more months. I’ve lived with it this long, and for basic needs it gets done what I need.

Is your cpu socket 754? You can probably purchase a turion x2 cpu off ebay for like 50$. Socket 754 was used both as a desktop and mobile socket. I had a desktop 754 system running a Turion x2.

Edit: Gah, I'm sorry. I meant to say I had a dual CPU Asrock motherboard(K8 combo-z). Turion X2 is not pin compatible with s754. My Asrock could run either or 754 or 939.

It is socket 939. For a while I was looking around eBay for an Athlon FX60 but they were all still going for around $200, and I couldn’t justify the cost, I would rather put it toward a new build.

 

[SickBeast]

OP I was in a similar situation. I had an Opteron 165 system that refused to run modern games. I went with a Phenom II combo deal that cost me $139. It's not the fastest quad core, but coming from my old system it's a huge upgrade.

I figure I can bide my time until all of these new 8 core CPUs trickle down through the channel.

 

[alcoholbob]

If you are really desperate for a performance boost, an A64 4200+ is probably only around $40 on ebay and should improve your performance significantly, at least 50%.

 

[aigomorla]

we've come out a period where we dont wait that long for upgrades.
Or its recommended that u dont.

Technology changes so fast, yesterday's top of the line will be equal compared to the budget line 3 yrs later.

spending even 1000 now.. another 1000 later... and so on... will give you better returns then spending all in 1 now.

 

[aphelion02]

I can’t budget a new build every 2-3 years. I can, however, justify $1,500-$2,000 right now. Also, my system isn’t worthless now, it’s just become frustrating. For normal email/websurfing, it’s perfectly fine for the most part, I can even still run PS CS3 well.

$800 will buy you a computer that will rock in almost all normal scenarios, and then you can spend another $800 in the future. Expensive and infrequent is a really bad way to go about it, as you spend a lot of money and yet still have a near obsolete computer half the time. A $1000 PC will give you 90% of the performance of a $2000 one, and both of them will be almost equally bad in 3 years.

 

[sandorski]

In a few months BD comes out. Probably worth the wait, if only to see what it brings. Since you're in no rush and all.

 

[RobertPters77]

@Essential

Your cpu is 939? I bought an x2 4800 for 50$ off ebay last year. The performance hit is minimal compared to an FX-60.

Edit: Whoops that's AM2.

Here's an X2 4200 s939.
http://cgi.ebay.com/AMD-Athlon-64-X...926?pt=CPUs&hash=item41586826ce#ht_500wt_1156

 

[superccs]

$800 will buy you a computer that will rock in almost all normal scenarios, and then you can spend another $800 in the future. Expensive and infrequent is a really bad way to go about it, as you spend a lot of money and yet still have a near obsolete computer half the time. A $1000 PC will give you 90% of the performance of a $2000 one, and both of them will be almost equally bad in 3 years.

This is the way to go, if you execute purchases and sell of your old kit you can stay reasonably up to date for not much money. I sold my E8400 based system for $200 less than my new system cost (mainly because I sold my DDR2 when it was crazy expensive). Got an X6 phenom II + 460 GTX and its great. Before my E8400 I had the old 3500+ in a 939 board, and again same thing, sold old gear as a media box and bought new stuff.

 

[dma0991]

So not worth it to spend that much money just for the top end parts especially when you put into consideration that these stuff goes obsolete very fast. Like the others have already mentioned it would be a lot better to get a rig at 1/2 of the money you are using now and use the other 1/2 in 3-4 years time. If you want to wait you can wait for Bulldozer. Even if you're not interested in getting BD it should still be worth the wait as SB prices will definitely drop when BD comes into the market.

 

[wwswimming]

the Sandy Bridge is an amazing design. comparable computing power to the 970, with a lot less power consumption.

in my case it offers about a 75% increase in speed and a 50% reduction in power consumption.

can you obtain a Kilawatt reading on your current PC ?

my PC uses about 200 watts, a 2600K system consumes about 100 watts if you can compromise on the video card.

what i like about that is i can power the 2600K system using 3 45 watt solar panels.

i'm on a mission to divorce the utility companies. they keep sending me bills !

 

[cantholdanymore]

I basically joined the forum since I'm in the same situation and I'm just waiting for a couple more month. Why?:

AMD Bulldozer
Intel Z68

If waiting for bulldozer turns out to be futile, at least you're getting the latest SB chipset that allow you to overclock AND use quick sync. From the rumors I've read it looks like IB may me available early 2012 but I'm not waiting that long

 

[essential]

spending even 1000 now.. another 1000 later... and so on... will give you better returns then spending all in 1 now.

$800 will buy you a computer that will rock in almost all normal scenarios, and then you can spend another $800 in the future. Expensive and infrequent is a really bad way to go about it, as you spend a lot of money and yet still have a near obsolete computer half the time. A $1000 PC will give you 90% of the performance of a $2000 one, and both of them will be almost equally bad in 3 years.

While I agree with both your sentiments, my situation only really allows me to spend once, any money I don't spend on this build will undoubtedly go toward other bills, and won't be there for another build in a year or two. So this is basically a one time build for me, and it will last me several years (I received an unexpected bonus at work that is allowing me to use the tax return toward a build).

I'm not trying to build a super computer, I don't need to spend it all, I just wanted an Intel Hexa-Core base to the system I built. I read the next-gen Hexa's would run in the $300-$400 range, similar to the current SB 2600k. Why not wait and spend maybe $100 or less more?

Outside of wanting a Intel Hexa-Core base, and an SSD (those new Sata III Intel and OCZ's run in the $300 range for 128gb), nothing else would be splurging in a new machine, just basics, I don't even need a standalone video card, I don't game.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

its not that bad man. I had an Opteron 170 til like 8 months ago!!! That's really just two 3500+s slapped together or something... hahah

If you get an i5 2500, you'll already blow my i7 930 out of the water...

 

[Topweasel]

While I agree with both your sentiments, my situation only really allows me to spend once, any money I don't spend on this build will undoubtedly go toward other bills, and won't be there for another build in a year or two. So this is basically a one time build for me, and it will last me several years (I received an unexpected bonus at work that is allowing me to use the tax return toward a build).

I'm not trying to build a super computer, I don't need to spend it all, I just wanted an Intel Hexa-Core base to the system I built. I read the next-gen Hexa's would run in the $300-$400 range, similar to the current SB 2600k. Why not wait and spend maybe $100 or less more?

Outside of wanting a Intel Hexa-Core base, and an SSD (those new Sata III Intel and OCZ's run in the $300 range for 128gb), nothing else would be splurging in a new machine.

Intel is not building a true consumer based Hexa-core CPU till IB and that isn't even certain. They are going to make a Octa and Hexa core SB but its going to be 2011, and probably the cheapest will be $500 and that's after spending more on the board and having to get 50% memory chips. That isn't being released till late this year, which may mean that IB could be over a year a way.

 

[aphelion02]

If you can live with the performance of a 5 year old computer, then you also don't need a hexacore. Get a $800 i5-2500k build and be done with it.