PDA

View Full Version : The right time to upgrade: 2014



mashakos
29-01-2013, 09:45 PM
This is for high end at least.

The next leap in gpu and cpu architectures seems to be in 2014:

nvidia roadmap
http://i.imgur.com/uYIe8.jpg

AMD roadmap
http://images.anandtech.com/doci/5503/Screen%20Shot%202012-02-02%20at%203.12.58%20PM.png

intel roadmap
http://cdn3.wccftech.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Intel-M-Series-Ivy-Bridge-Haswell.jpg
http://cdn3.wccftech.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Intel-4th-Generation-Haswell-635x358.jpg

The last time this happened was in 2006. Compare the highest end hardware of 2005 to that of 2006:
CPU: Amd Athlon FX-60, worth $1000+
absolutely trounced by: Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 worth $400

GPU: nvidia Geforce 7950 GX2, supports dx9 only, worth $600+
absolutely trounced by: nvidia Geforce 8800GTX, supports dx10, worth $500

A top of the line 2005 machine, worth $3000 was relegated to mid/low end in the span of a year, and is now totally worthless performance wise.
Meanwhile, a top of the line 2006 machine is still relevant today (Core 2 Extreme quad core, 4GB ram 8800GTX)

discuss.

Grizzly
29-01-2013, 09:56 PM
That's what they said in 2012!

mashakos
29-01-2013, 10:07 PM
That's what they said in 2012!

you jest, but I honestly thought the big jump was going to happen with LGA2011 / Kepler. Sadly I was mistaken.
Sure, the gtx680 and the core i7 3930k/3960x are huge upgrades but not something that will last till 2017...

Grizzly
29-01-2013, 10:16 PM
you jest, but I honestly thought the big jump was going to happen with LGA2011 / Kepler. Sadly I was mistaken.

Me too, that's why I said it :P.
I am quite sure that most of this will actually depend on the console market - Nvidia may shout "Super effeciŽnt cards next year!" but they first need to deliver, and super effeciency will not mean that absolute performance actually increases.

Sakkura
29-01-2013, 10:24 PM
Exponential performance growth is nothing new. And the GTX 600s and HD 7000s were major upgrades over their predecessors already. Measured by today's demands, the difference between eg. a Geforce 256 and a Geforce4 Ti is tiny, but it was huge back then.

Or in other words, that first graph needs to have a logarithmic Y axis.

deano2099
29-01-2013, 10:34 PM
The last time this happened was in 2006.

When the last generation of consoles launched. The next is in 2014, so all seems quite likely.

mashakos
29-01-2013, 11:38 PM
Measured by today's demands, the difference between eg. a Geforce 256 and a Geforce4 Ti is tiny, but it was huge back then.
really? I think the difference was huge - the geforce 4 Ti outclassed the PS2 and xbox while the original geforce 256 was a step up from the voodoo 2.

Kadayi
29-01-2013, 11:55 PM
@mashakos

Do you think with the proposed specs of the new consoles there's going to much need for big upgrades overall? Also do you envisage a shift towards Blu-Ray as far as discs go, or do you see microsoft maybe copping out paying Sony the licence and opting for something else (maybe reviving HD-DVD as a game only format?)

mashakos
30-01-2013, 12:32 AM
Me too, that's why I said it :P.
I am quite sure that most of this will actually depend on the console market - Nvidia may shout "Super effeciŽnt cards next year!" but they first need to deliver, and super effeciency will not mean that absolute performance actually increases.
I'm not realy focussing on what's in the roadmap announcements, just that it looks to be the right time for a generation leap as deano2099 mentioned:

When the last generation of consoles launched. The next is in 2014, so all seems quite likely.


@mashakos

Do you think with the proposed specs of the new consoles there's going to much need for big upgrades overall? Also do you envisage a shift towards Blu-Ray as far as discs go, or do you see microsoft maybe copping out paying Sony the licence and opting for something else (maybe reviving HD-DVD as a game only format?)

it's hard to compare consoles and PCs on specs alone, remember that the nvidia 7950 GX2 is way more powerful than the Nvidia RSX chip found in the PS3 yet that card cannot even hope to match what has been possible on that console. Some of the more advanced PS3 exclusives use the cpu for most graphics rendering, which tells you that developers have spent a lot of time and effort eking out performance from console hardware in a way PC devs never will (or practically be able to considering the variety of hardware configurations).

Regarding Bluray, it's hard to say. If Rockstar are comfortable releasing Max Payne 3 - a 23GB game - on steam then it might mean the focus for game distribution will be online only for the PC. As I understand it, a lot of game developers have voiced their discomfort in releasing retail on the PC because of how unpredictable it is. Steam as a more "developer friendly" way for them to make and sell PC games, since it has proven it's commercial viability over the past 5 years.

Sakkura
30-01-2013, 12:40 AM
really? I think the difference was huge - the geforce 4 Ti outclassed the PS2 and xbox while the original geforce 256 was a step up from the voodoo 2.
The difference was huge back then, as I just said. But measured by today's performance, they are both nearly equally weak. Put them in that graph of yours up top and they'd both be pretty much at 0.

That's the whole point, the graph is misleading. There is nothing sudden and revolutionary in that roadmap, just a steady performance progression as usual.

The JG Man
30-01-2013, 01:01 AM
Regarding blu-ray, considering both new consoles from MS and Sony will be using it, along with the fact that even Nintendo uses a version of it with the WiiU, I wouldn't be surprised if some PC multi-platform titles had a blu-ray retail copy...of course, I could also see PC going even more towards digital distribution, something even Nintendo has caught on to, which should say something. Even if they're still awful at it, but that's another argument.

Well I suppose this thread has helped me, actually. I was going to upgrade my graphics card this year, considering I built this in 2011 and put in a 6850. It seems it'd be best I wait a little while longer. No harm done!

Heliocentric
30-01-2013, 01:03 AM
Does that first graph look like an acceleration curve to anyone else? As in, a suggestion that things are not indeed tapering off?

Lukasz
30-01-2013, 01:06 AM
8000 series from amd will be released in second quarter of this year. That surely will result in price drop of 7000 and 600 series. So I would wait with gpu update unless you need one right now.

mashakos
30-01-2013, 01:08 AM
The difference was huge back then, as I just said. But measured by today's performance, they are both nearly equally weak. Put them in that graph of yours up top and they'd both be pretty much at 0.

That's the whole point, the graph is misleading. There is nothing sudden and revolutionary in that roadmap, just a steady performance progression as usual.

look at it this way: there may not be that big a leap graphically when you go from a Dreamcast to a Playstation 2/xbox, but if you purchased Dreamcast level PC hardware, you were pretty much out of luck during that generation unless you made a major PC overhaul (SDRam to DDR, P4 to Athlon, dx7 gpu to dx8/dx9 gpu).

Sakkura
30-01-2013, 02:02 AM
look at it this way: there may not be that big a leap graphically when you go from a Dreamcast to a Playstation 2/xbox, but if you purchased Dreamcast level PC hardware, you were pretty much out of luck during that generation unless you made a major PC overhaul (SDRam to DDR, P4 to Athlon, dx7 gpu to dx8/dx9 gpu).
I'd love to look at it that way, but your graph does not look at it that way. That's what I'm trying to tell you.

Sakkura
30-01-2013, 02:08 AM
8000 series from amd will be released in second quarter of this year. That surely will result in price drop of 7000 and 600 series. So I would wait with gpu update unless you need one right now.
Not necessarily, the 6000s and 500s didn't really get much cheaper when the current hardware was introduced.


Does that first graph look like an acceleration curve to anyone else? As in, a suggestion that things are not indeed tapering off?
It's the same exponential growth you see in most aspects of computer performance. It's an offshoot of Moore's law. It does not mean that dramatic gains are about to be made, it simply means business as usual. Then again, it's only a roadmap.

Heliocentric
30-01-2013, 02:27 AM
I completely agree, x2 horsepower results in only incremental performance gains, nature of having so many choke points.

mashakos
30-01-2013, 02:39 AM
I'd love to look at it that way, but your graph does not look at it that way. That's what I'm trying to tell you.

the leap was pretty gigantic from 2005 to 2006 if you may recall. Also:


I'm not realy focussing on what's in the roadmap announcements, just that it looks to be the right time for a generation leap as deano2099 mentioned:

DaftPunk
30-01-2013, 09:34 AM
I dont know if people saw on main RPS page,but there was article about new console's hardware and it wasn't looking good for them lol.

corbain
30-01-2013, 12:06 PM
the leap was pretty gigantic from 2005 to 2006 if you may recall. Also:

Sakkura is right mate, read up on logarithmic scale and then come back

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

Think about it like the stock market.

if you took a graph showing from back when the FTSE-100 index was at 500.. the leap from 500 to 750 pts is a HUGE 50% leap.

If you then show a graph of the whole FTSE-100 history up until today, that leap from 500 to 750 seems an inconsequential mini stepping stone on the path to 6,300 where we stand today.

It's not quite the same thing, but illustrates how scale changes how big a step something seems.

mashakos
30-01-2013, 12:56 PM
It's not quite the same thing, but illustrates how scale changes how big a step something seems.

in my understanding the leap in 2006 was a milestone. It's not as big a milestone as PCs moving away from command line to GUI interfaces or anything like that, but it is a significant milestone in that there was a clear cutoff where everything that even came one month before that period was made obsolete.

Boris
30-01-2013, 02:21 PM
Does that first graph look like an acceleration curve to anyone else? As in, a suggestion that things are not indeed tapering off?

Things might still be tapering off. The basic rule of computing is Moore's Law. You've probably heard of it. The number of transistors in an IC doubles about every 2 years.

This means you start with 1. Then 2. Then 4. 8. 16. 32. It goes up exponentially.

Now slow that growth to about 1.9 times per 2 year. The curve still goes up really fast: 1. 1,9. 3,6. 6,8. 13. 24,7.

There's still a big jump every year, but in about 5 generations the hardware is "only" 24 times as fast as opposed to 32 times. In other words, it's still increasing, but also tapering off.

There's a great plot of this on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law and that shows the correct way of plotting such data: On a logarithmic scale.

Caddybear
02-02-2013, 12:36 AM
Hey, I'll probably have enough cash by then to build a cutting edge machine that will last me for a few years because of new console generation. It's good to know when the new toys that actually matter (for those of us who can't buy a new card every time a new one is out ) will happen, so thanks.

I wonder what kind of computers we will be using by 2020. Only thing I'm sad about having to die is that I won't get to see what technology will bring. I mean, people imagined we would be living on Mars by now ... but nobody could foresee the smartphones.

Finicky
09-03-2013, 08:46 PM
Does that first graph look like an acceleration curve to anyone else? As in, a suggestion that things are not indeed tapering off?
Nvidia graphs are never to be taken seriously. According to them tegra 2 was way faster than tegra and tegra 3 would shit on it from above the clouds, but performance was nothing like that in the final product.

According to nvidias 2004 gpu chart the RSX in ps3 was going to be a 2 teraflop gpu (hahahahahaha)

Their graphs are literally completely worthless.

@ op, I wouldn't hold my breath for any real value increases in 2013 - 2014, amd and nvidia are currently choosing not to compete, not performance wise nor price wise
A gtx 580 cost about 120 dollars to produce in 2010 and was selling for 500 at retail, that was a giant 520mm^2 die that had low yields in the factory and had a respectable 384bit memory bus.

Now they are selling the spiritual successor (gk 110, 560mm die, 384 bit bus) for 1000 dollars and marketing their mid range 260mm die 256bit bus cheap as hell to produce product as the 'high end' with matching 500 dollar price tag.

The price/die space has been doubled, there is no value to be had anymore.
Amd have gone and delayed their 8 series cards by an entire year (into late 2013-early 2014) since they are profiting from giant mark ups with their current cards as well.

I expect amd, intel and nvidia to just keep marketing around performance/watt and being green instead of performance/dollar and being fast.
Expect a 10 percent performance tick for intel haswell later this year along with another drop in power consumption (selling low end low power parts instead of scaling up transistor counts for performance) along with another price increase since AMD has nothing to compete with.
Leaked intel roadmaps already show a brandname shift for haswell to calling their (only) unlocked quad core cpu 4670k instead of 4500k, which signifies another price increase (the same thing amd did with their gpus)

As for maxwell,nvidia and amd have both shifted to releasing their midrange (now rebranded low end) cards first at a hefty premium for people eager to benifit from increased performance/watt, and only to start selling the larger midrange die lower yield cards 6 months later at the 500-600 dollar premium price.
Maxwell will be on the 20nm procedť so I expect the exact same thing to happen.
gtx 760 first at 400 dollars in early 2014 with performance similar to gtx 680, then a midrange 780 half a year later at full premium, with the actual high end large die card being released in their new titan brand lineup.

I agree with OP that it's best to wait for the haswell and maxwell releases to upgrade since the current gen is approaching 1.5 years of age without any real price drops in the high end (mid range in reality) , but if you are expecting another big performance boost you are going to be sorely dissapointed.

What you'll get is lower power consumption and being sold smaller cheaper dies at bigger premiums with a higher model number.

I'm not being negative I'm being realistic, the performance race is over for both companies in the duopolies, pc market is considered to have stalled (which in real people terms means it is fucking huge, but in marketing terms means they have no incentive to try to attract more people with good value, ah the joys of the American take on capitalism)
The consumer has proven to be willing to shell out high premiums for desktop parts since 2010 and since there are no third players in the hdd, cpu and gpu markets who can swoop in for a piece of the pie they don't have to compete and have a price war anymore.
You can quote me on all of this in a year and laugh at me if any of it turns out differently, I would love to be laughed at since that would mean consumers wouldn't get fucked up the ass.

Neither amd or nvidia has any reason to lower prices when they can shift lower volumes at 3-4x the profit margin without having to worry about yields.
Surplusses in production get either castrated : in the form of a crippled memory bus like the gtx 660 ti so it's a no AA-1080p only card (go look it up if you don't know about it) , or 1GB versions of the hd7850
Or cherrypicked as OC editions for an additional premium.

mashakos
10-03-2013, 12:46 AM
^ You could be right, but I think that things are going to be shaken up very significantly in the next 2-3 years. I'm sure Intel, amd and nvidia have seen the success of media players and internet connected consoles in the living room and are thinking to themselves "we can do better than this". We'll see.