incentive to upgrade, wth is moore?

[cytg111]

incentive to upgrade a Q9450, soon to be going on it's fourth year ..

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/51?vs=287

while an upgrade, yes, it is not an "UPGRADE" .. seeing ivy will be another 5-10% give and take, haswell another 30% .. I dont see the big point in upgrading this oc'ed chip well beyond haswell's "tock" (whatever it is called).

Is moore taking a nap on the couch or is it all coming to an end?

( first time i have a system on my hands that will last me 7+ years, and survive 4 windows interations, xp, vista, 7 and upcoming 8 )

 

[Bryf50]

incentive to upgrade a Q9450, soon to be going on it's fourth year ..

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/51?vs=287

while an upgrade, yes, it is not an "UPGRADE" .. seeing ivy will be another 5-10% give and take, haswell another 30% .. I dont see the big point in upgrading this oc'ed chip well beyond haswell's "tock" (whatever it is called).

Is moore taking a nap on the couch or is it all coming to an end?

( first time i have a system on my hands that will last me 7+ years, and survive 4 windows interations, xp, vista, 7 and upcoming 8 )

The benchmarks that you posted show your cpu getting smacked around sometimes by 100% or more. Not really helping your argument.

 

[rgallant]

2600k =3.4 + a 40% overclock = 4.76
-and you can oc your q9450 chip to ?

 

[gmaster456]

If you don't want to upgrade then don't.

 

[soccerballtux]

very nicely paired keep dumping new graphics cards in. Here's to hoping studios start multithreading more and we'll never need to upgrade.

 

[Yuriman]

The benchmarks that you posted show your cpu getting smacked around sometimes by 100% or more. Not really helping your argument.

As far as games go, his chip is still staying over 60fps in those listed. If gaming is your concern, the difference between his Q9450 and modern chips isn't that big, and will not likely be the difference between acceptable and unplayable for a few years yet.

It does get thrashed in encoding, though.

 

[cytg111]

The benchmarks that you posted show your cpu getting smacked around sometimes by 100% or more. Not really helping your argument.

Indeed, sometimes, a *whoopin* 100% (sarcasm detected) .. for a chip 4 years old! Dictating moores law we should see approx 250% at this timepoint. Ivy 5-10% and haswell for another 30 surely aint catching up ... As far as I can tell, we're slowing down!

 

[sm625]

I was running a Q6600 at 3GHz for 4 years. I am now running the equivalent of an i5-2400 (its actually an i5-750 at 3.8GHz) Single threaded operations are supposedly 50% faster. Context switching is a lot faster. Memory bandwidth and latency are much improved. But when it comes right down to it, it does not really feel all that much faster. Video encodes take 28 minutes instead of 45. I have to struggle to notice the speed difference, but I do notice it.

What I really notice is that my computer only pulls 70-something watts at idle instead of 110. And it now sleeps and hibernates without any issues, leading to further power savings and ease of use. Power consumption during a LoL game is only about 10% less though. This is a bit of a disappointment.

 

[jsedlak]

Indeed, sometimes, a *whoopin* 100% (sarcasm detected) .. for a chip 4 years old! Dictating moores law we should see approx 250% at this timepoint. Ivy 5-10% and haswell for another 30 surely aint catching up ... As far as I can tell, we're slowing down!

Moore's law doesn't mention speed, only transistor count.

 

[pauldun170]

incentive to upgrade a Q9450, soon to be going on it's fourth year ..

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/51?vs=287

while an upgrade, yes, it is not an "UPGRADE" .. seeing ivy will be another 5-10% give and take, haswell another 30% .. I dont see the big point in upgrading this oc'ed chip well beyond haswell's "tock" (whatever it is called).

Is moore taking a nap on the couch or is it all coming to an end?

( first time i have a system on my hands that will last me 7+ years, and survive 4 windows interations, xp, vista, 7 and upcoming 8 )

An upgrade to me is worth it if it overcomes a real world bottleneck.
Benchmark scores are not real world.

A game averages 60FPS and never dips below 40FPS on 3-4 year old processor A
Same game averages 90FPS and never dips below 60FPS on brand spanking new processor B

Is it really worth upgrading?
Not too me since in real world game play I'm not going to notice the difference.

When I get to the point where I have to lower settings to play games smoothly then I consider upgrading. Chasing benchmarks is just a $$$$ wasted if there is no tangible benefit.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Indeed, sometimes, a *whoopin* 100% (sarcasm detected) .. for a chip 4 years old! Dictating moores law we should see approx 250% at this timepoint. Ivy 5-10% and haswell for another 30 surely aint catching up ... As far as I can tell, we're slowing down!

Keep in mind that back in the days where we had bigger performance improvements per year, power usage increased exponentially, despite the fact each process generation gave better gains than they do now. Nowadays the CPUs(and video cards) are power limited.

 

[rgallant]

An upgrade to me is worth it if it overcomes a real world bottleneck.
Benchmark scores are not real world.

A game averages 60FPS and never dips below 40FPS on 3-4 year old processor A
Same game averages 90FPS and never dips below 60FPS on brand spanking new processor B

Is it really worth upgrading?
Not too me since in real world game play I'm not going to notice the difference.

When I get to the point where I have to lower settings to play games smoothly then I consider upgrading. Chasing benchmarks is just a $$$$ wasted if there is no tangible benefit.

not saying your wrong but just saying:

when bf3 came out the only people it seemed that did not have any issues were x58 and 580sli\6970cf people.-that's on ultra maxed 1080p-1200

-1155 people had to turn off ht in most cases.

- not talking 50-100 peeps but multi k's on all the bf3 forums.
-yea 99% of peeps thinking their systems can handle bf3 , but really they could not. lacking gpu power, vram spikes, unstable oc's, out of date drivers, settings too high for their systems including out of date cpu's.

-how often do you get a bios updates for a 4 year old mid. range mb. and eol chipsets?

-if it works for you fine ,but a lot of people like a balanced gaming system ,

-yea I'm due so looking around.

 

[Ratman6161]

OP you never said what you are doing with the machine. For most general purpose use, what you have is fine and there is no reason at all to upgrade.

 

[nyker96]

personally I think you need a reason to upgrade, maybe you do something cpu intensive that you wait on etc. But otherwise, I wouldn't bother with it. save the cash get a new ipad or something.

 

[cytg111]

Moore's law doesn't mention speed, only transistor count.

- well, yeah, but still, the point remains..

we can all go here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law and get the laydown.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

You're doing it wrong.

Compare it to the upcoming E5-2687W, see if it's not 250% faster in threaded applications.

 

[cytg111]

An upgrade to me is worth it if it overcomes a real world bottleneck.
Benchmark scores are not real world.

A game averages 60FPS and never dips below 40FPS on 3-4 year old processor A
Same game averages 90FPS and never dips below 60FPS on brand spanking new processor B

Is it really worth upgrading?
Not too me since in real world game play I'm not going to notice the difference.

When I get to the point where I have to lower settings to play games smoothly then I consider upgrading. Chasing benchmarks is just a $$$$ wasted if there is no tangible benefit.

- Totally agreed, and while software has gotten more demanding, emulation upon emulation, wasting cycles into deep space (thinking flash and sorts here) has a limit too .. And it seems that some of those will be going away soon anyway and windows 8 being more slick that vista and 7 ..

how often do you get a bios updates for a 4 year old mid. range mb. and eol chipsets?

- And this is a valid point I think .. it's not that the hardware cannot handle it, in many cases it just needs a firmware upgrade... and that sucks, the ecosystem expects us to upgrade, putting a fixed EOL on the shipping products.
And maybe PCIE 3.0, or lack there off, will be an upgrade limiter with the next cycle of cards to come (680+ 7850+)

OP you never said what you are doing with the machine. For most general purpose use, what you have is fine and there is no reason at all to upgrade.

- Game(swtor, l4d, duke, deus ex) - the new stuff, cause I love to see the next level of technology. I got a 580 gtx some time back (up from a 4850), and all settings are maxed .. Happy camper
- Code(Java, C#, C++ .... ), and here the SSD upgrade i did recently was the single most significent upgrade i have done to my coding.. Some of the high level tools are quite... big, codebases get huge (many many small files), cluttered etc, resulting in many many small delays.. SSD = that shit gone, stuff is seamless now, its a thing of beauty.

No, not at a single "CPU Constrained" moment here ...
(the JVM, CLR is constanly improving in performance too..)