Obsolescence

[Haervii]

In 1998 at exactly this time of year, I bought a computer. A Pentium 200, for $800. One year passed, and it was virtually obsolete. In one year. Now I am planning to build my own computer. I didn't know what sort of abyss I had stepped into. After much strenuous research on the internet, I have a better idea of what I need and want, and what would be good for me now. I do have a few other technical questions left, but I know they can easily be answered. The other day, however, I picked an old magazine in a waiting room from Jan. 1998, a few months before I made by regretful descion. I looked in it, and there were advertisments for Pentium II 300's. For...get ready, now..
$3000.
THAT put me into a depressed mood. I was ( and am, I guess) planning to get a P3 550-600 or a Celeron II 566-633. When I got home I looked in a recent PC magazine. What was $3000? Pentium 1Ghz. Now, Pentium 300's are now somewhat low tech. I believe we can all agree with that. 1 Ghz computers are the new wave. We will never think of THEM as low tech. But in two years time... who knows? And the P3 550? It would be considered somewhat of an artifact. I like to play games on my computer, but now I'm about to botch it all and wait for a Playstation 2. Give me some reassurance, guys! Please!

[SysOpt]

Unfortunately that's just the way it is and the way it has been for the last 5-10 years. Technological advancement comes quickly. If you want the best at any given time, you have to be willing to accept that it will no longer be the best in a few months.

The best way to stay on the cutting edge is to plan ahead and build a system that can be easily upgraded - it's people who end up having to replace entire systems that lose out. Being able to upgrade the CPU, memory, graphics card, etc., as pieces, will save you a great deal of frustration.

[Richard_Cranium72]

Two years ago I'd told you a 100 mhz machine was useless, I was WRONG. There is a use for older machines, surfing, light scanning/printing. For sure if you are a on-line gamer or avid at home player maybe a really recent machine fits your need. If you are confined to a city , you don't need a Ferrarri. Sit back and think about the need before you commit to the idea that "I got to have the Fastest machine". I've refurbed(read cleaned) a few old P100's and P120's and I'm suprised at how responsive a first step overclock is. Previously on all of them(Win98) opening the start+programs+ whatever took a little while, after o/c it snaps to attention. Granted it won't show fantastic benchmarks, but It's gonna keep on keeping on.. IMO, DrVette

[grandslammer]

Well guys, here goes........

Call me a scinic (? well you know what I mean?) Call me sceptical, but I in no way believe that with the literally billions of dollars used in research and developement that the big boys actually come up with25 or 33 or 50 mhz jumps in processor speeds. Like BANG! your 500 is dust, now we have a 533, or a 550! No way! Just propaganda to leech our bucks every few months.

As far as the 1 Gigahertz barrier, BS! Of course, I believe this is a monumental step, and a year ago who had heard of one billion cycles per second? Let alone expected to own a computer capable of it!

But if the technology exists now, then it existed before. I just don't trust companies with more annual revenue than a lot of countries. Know what I mean, Verne?

Me, as soon as I get on my feet, I'm going to get the best board and periferals I can afford, be it for a PIII or an Athlon. Then maybe a500 to 700mhz processor and clock it. Then as I can afford it, I'll get the faster processor, maybe I'll get a Ghz when the 1.2's come out.

Good luck inb your decision and subsequent purchases. Just don't try to get the state-of-the-art processors, etc., because in 6 months (heck, two months!) they won't be any more.

Good Luck Guys...

M


[This message has been edited by grandslammer (edited 04-15-2000).]

[brandon184]

Computers are horrible things financial-wise.

My best advice is to build/buy a computer that is highly upgradeable and don't expect it to be new forever.

[shadow]

I agree, it all depends on what you want and need. And the old ones still have their place. I have 3 computers, a 166mmx, a 166mmx oc'd to 188 and a PII350.
I don't do anything on my faster computer that can't be done on the slower ones but I guess if I was a big gamer or needed high power for other big programs I may feel a need to buy bigger and faster. I'll stick with my slow machines and have fun getting all I can out of them until I can't stand it anymore, then i'll pick up a used 500 or 600 for dirt cheap http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

[hd581]

Yeah, shadow has a good point. It's the gamers who have the biggest gripe w/ technology changes. Gaming is very demanding of the latest and greatest. My fastest machine is a P2-233 which I've had for 2 years and will keep for many more. I'm not sure 200 is obsolete right now. My Cyrix PR166 works well as a Web/FTP/File/Print server, and as an internet splitter.

[Biff]

Technology eh! Somethings I dont look back on. P75 for $4500. Matrox Mystic 4meg $300. 4meg edo ram $300. Technology is great, but if you want to be on the cutting edge your gonna pay. I write it off afterwards, like buying gas, I dont think about all the tankfulls I've bought.
Everything has a big markup, how else are we going to survive. I dont have anymosity for Intel or Mr. Softie, doing what they do best

[cyclone2]

Well Haervii one good thing is that games are not keeping up with processor speeds, it now takes about 2 years to make a game and in those 2 yrs your speed potential has gone up greatly. Look at all of todays games (and other applications) and they are designing them to run on 200 mhz machines. So there is still life left in those machines. I think the day will soon come where a certain speed is fast enough, who cares about saving 32 milliseconds for my app to load.

[Haervii]

Thanks for the responses, guys. I guess I'll wait to see if the Playstation 2 or X-Box are as good as I think they will be, and if they're not, I'll buy a new computer. However, If perchance I did a computer now, how fast would it have to be to play the games three years from now? Or, could any computer that is available now even PLAY any new games in three years? Thanks for any ideas any one might have.

[SysOpt]

There's no way to predict how fast it would have to be to play games three years from now - no offense, but that's really the worst way to go about addressing the issue of wanting a PC that will be current for three years.

Look at the problem this way:

You could buy a single really super duper fast PC for about $3,500 right now (1GHz, perhaps), that would blow all of the current software apps out of the water, and MIGHT hang on for a couple years depending upon how quickly software advances.. OR...

You could buy or build a good UPGRADABLE PC now for $1,500 or so and spend $1,500 over the next three years upgrading it (processor, memory, graphics, and hard disk), ensuring that it will always be current.

Keep in mind that the above numbers are by no means absolute. It's quite possible to build an extremely powerful system these days for $1,000 or less, and upgrade it over the next few years for $1k or less as well. I included the numbers to illustrate the upgrade point.

Scott


[This message has been edited by SysOpt (edited 04-16-2000).]

[drojman]

I built my k62 3d 300 2 years ago, paid almost 200 bucks for the chip, LOL. put a tnt 16meg in it, with 64meg ram, then upped it to 128. 6.4gig hd. still runs all the games fine, oc'd to 400, and tnt oc'd too. Just now is it getting that it doesn't kick ****. can't run UT in the highest quality settings. if I play a game with more than about 8-10 players, it gets really choppy. but I had about 800 bucks into the machine. now, i can upgrade the video card for like 150, and the mobo/cpu for 350, and be top of the line again with an athlon setup at 600mhz that kick **** again. that's my take on it. there is usually a price break in each category where you get the most bang for your buck. especially in hard drives, and cpus. get the model just before the big price jump. you should be fine for a year or 2, and then , you should be able to upgrade the cpu even further with the same mobo. at least we know a 600 athlon can hit 1 gig for sure. its done! thats a hell of a jump! and in a year or 2, it'll probably be like 300 bucks or less. good luck on your decisions. and it never gets any better!

[U-96]

I entirely agree! In fact, the core system is becoming less important for gamers now - it is increasingly the graphics card that makes or breaks a cutting edge game...
As it is, my Celeron 400@500 gets perfectly acceptable (defined as no stuttering) framerates for games such as Falcon4, Unreal Tournament, etc. The Voodoo3 is responsible for much of this.
The components in my PC are about a year old now, and with its current performance, I see no justification for upgrading anything else in the medium term (6-12 months). Just make sure you build that same upgrade ability into your own system, as I did following advice on this very board http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

BTW those old Pentium MMXs and Classics make great additions to a home network, make it into a dedicated Linux box to play around with or give it to a school running some sort of Computers for Kids scheme - they are still perfectly capable of word processing and accessing the WWW.

U-96

[konan3]

Well the rate of technical advancement that has occured over the last 2 or so years can't be sustained in my opinion because the majority of the computer buying public are going to be finding less and less reasons to upgrade from that box they're using. Gamers aside most of us wouldn't come close to testing the limits of what's currently available let alone future equipment. Even the gamers before long will be in the same boat, I mean people aren't going to keep throwing hard earned money into the bottomless pit when the tangable return on dollars spent is getting to be less and less. Anyone want to spend $500 to get an extra 5fps in quake6?

[tonym]

Remember, the chip makers and the system integrators don't plan obsolescence, they just follow the curve of Moore's law and the public's demand for faster, faster, faster machines.

It is true, however, that 50-100MHz clock rate increases are normal and expected...we really haven't had a true breakthrough in processor technology/architecture or semiconductor processing technology (except for copper interconnects) in a while (with the lone exception of Transmeta, but that's another story!) that a leapfrogging of clock rates hasn't been possible. there are some exciting developments on the horizon at IBM, Intel, AMD and Motorola, and when you see a 100MHz or more jump in processor speed in a newly- introduced product, you know we're entering new technology territory!

The bottom line is that you'll wait FOREVER to buy the ultimate PC (or the ultimate anything) as the moment a PC is designed, manufactured and sold it is obsolete! If you want the best PC for your particular set of needs, do your homework and then don't be afraid to buy. And as other advice has pointed out, always plan for and require expansion or upgradability from the PC that you ultimately buy.

Tony